THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 

RIVERSIDE 


LIFE    OF    FROUDE 


ff 


THE 

LIFE    OF    FROUDE 


HERBERT    PAUL 

I/I 


NEW   YORK 

CHARLES    SCRIBNER'S    SONS 

153-157   FIFTH  AVENUE 

1905 


F1 


PREFACE 

ALTHOUGH  eleven  years  have  elapsed  since  Mr.  Froude's 
death,  no  biography  of  him  has,  so  far  as  I  know,  ap- 
peared. This  book  is  an  attempt  to  tell  the  public 
something  about  a  man  whose  writings  have  a  per- 
manent place  in  the  literature  of  England. 

It  is  a  pleasure  to  acknowledge  my  obligation  to 
Miss  Margaret  Froude  for  having  allowed  me  the  use 
of  such  written  material  as  existed.  A  large  number  of 
Mr.  Froude's  letters  were  destroyed  after  his  death,  and 
it  was  not  intended  by  the  family  that  any  biography 
of  him  should  be  written.  Finding  that  I  was  engaged 
upon  the  task,  Miss  Froude  supplied  those  facts,  dates, 
and  papers  which  were  essential  to  the  accuracy  of  the 
narrative.  Mr.  Froude's  niece,  Mrs.  St.  Leger  Harrison, 
known  to  the  world  as  Lucas  Malet,  has  allowed  me  to 
use  some  of  her  uncle's  letters  to  her  mother. 

Lady  Margaret  Cecil  has,  with  great  kindness,  permitted 
me  to  make  copious  extracts  from  Mr.  Froude's  letters 
to  her  mother,  the  late  Countess  of  Derby.  I  must 
also  express  my  gratitude  to  Sir  Thomas  Sanderson, 
Lord  Derby's  executor,  to  Cardinal  Newman's  literary 


vi  PREFACE 

representative  Mr.  Edward  Bellasis,  and  to  Mr.  Arthur 
Clough,  son  of  Froude's  early  friend  the  poet. 

Mr.  James  Rye,  of  Balliol  College,  Oxford,  placed  at 
my  disposal,  with  singular  generosity,  the  results  of 
his  careful  examination  into  the  charges  made  against 
Mr.  Froude  by  Mr.  Freeman. 

The  Rector  of  Exeter  was  good  enough  to  show  me  the 
entries  in  the  college  books  bearing  upon  Mr.  Froude's 
resignation  of  his  Fellowship,  and  to  tell  me  everything 
he  knew  on  the  subject. 

My  indebtedness  to  the  late  Sir  John  Skelton's  de- 
lightful book,  The  Table  Talk  of  Shirley,  will  be  obvious 
to  my  readers. 

I  have,  in  conclusion,  to  thank  my  old  friend  Mr. 
Birrell,  for  lending  me  his  very  rare  copy  of  the  funeral 
sermon  preached  by  Mr.  Froude  at  Torquay. 

October  30,  1905. 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER    I 

CHILDHOOD 

PAGE 

Early  Surroundings — Father  and  Mother — Hurrell  Froude 
— First  School — Sent  to  Westminster — Returns  Home 
in  Disgrace — Archdeacon  Froude's  Harsh  Treatment — 
Hurrell's  Attitude — Preparation  for  Oxford — Death 
of  Hurrell  Froude I 

'CHAPTER    II 

OXFORD 

Oriel  College  —  Dr.  Hawkins  —  J.  H.  Newman  —  Idle 
and  Luxurious  Life  —  His  Engagement  —  Degree  — 
Tracts  for  The  Times — Tutorship  in  Ireland — Mr. 
Cleaver — Dr.  Pusey — Returns  to  Oxford — Chancellor's 
Prizeman  —  Employed  by  Newman — Ordination — 
Shadows  of  the  Clouds,  The  Nemesis  of  Faith — Arthur 
Clough — Charles  Kingsley — Resignation  of  Fellowship  19 

CHAPTER    III 

LIBERTY 

Worldly  Prospects  and  Intellectual  Position — Sojourn  with 
Kingsley  —  Crabb  Robinson  —  Monckton  Milnes  — 
Manchester  Tutorship  —  Marriage  —  Max  Muller  — 
Views  on  Socialism — Matthew  Arnold — The  Carlyles — 
F.  D.  Maurice — Commencement  of  The  History  of 
England  .........  50 


viii  CONTENTS 

CHAPTER    IV 

THE    HISTORY 

PAGE 

Study  and  Research — Carlyle's  Verdict  on  the  Early  Chap- 
ters— The  First  Two  Volumes  published — Reviews — 
The  Weak  Points — Death  of  Mrs.  Froude — Editor- 
ship of  Fraser's  Magazine — Journey  to  Spain — Re- 
search at  Simancas — Second  Marriage — The  Hatfield 
Papers — Lord  and  Lady  Salisbury — Lord  Rector  of  St. 
Andrews  University — The  Completion  of  the  History  .  72 

CHAPTER    V 

FROUDE   AND    FREEMAN 

The  Saturday  Review — Freeman's  Hatred  of  Froude — His 
Contempt  for  Froude's  Research — The  Contemporary 
Review — Dean  Hook — Froude's  Accuracy  assailed  by 
Freeman — Froude's  Challenge — The  Reply — The  Con- 
troversy renewed — "  A  Few  Words  on  Mr.  Freeman  " 
— "  Last  Words  on  Mr.  Froude  " — Freeman's  Defeat — 
Froude  vindicated  .  .  .  .  .  .  .147 

CHAPTER    VI 


Catholicism  and  Irish  Aspirations — Daniel  O'Connell — The 
English  in  Ireland — Invited  to  Lecture  in  America 
—  Professor  Tyndall  —  The  New  York  Banquet  — 
The  Lectures  —  American  Criticism  —  Irish  Hostility 
— Father  Burke  —  Mr.  Peabody  —  Carlyle  and  The 
English  in  Ireland — Carlyle  on  Lecky — Lady  Derby — 
Gladstone  .........  199 

CHAPTER    VII 

SOUTH   AFRICA 

Death  of  Froude's  second  wife  —  Lord  Carnarvon  — 
Visits  South  Africa — Lord  Kimberley — President  Brand 
— Returns  to  England — Second  Visit  to  South  Africa — 
Lord  Wolseley — Sir  Bartle  Frere — Report  of  Visit 
laid  before  Parliament — South  African  Policy — Pro- 
posed Parliamentary  Candidature — Lord  Derby — 
The  Eastern  Question .250 


CONTENTS  ix 

CHAPTER    VIII 

FROUDE    AND    CARLYLE 

PAGE 

Friendship  with  Carlyle — A  Picture  of  Mrs.  Carlyle — Her 
Sudden  Death — The  Letters  and  Memorials — Publica- 
tion of  The  Reminiscences — Mary  Carlyle's  Charge — 
Froude's  Defence — Mr.  Justice  Stephen — John  Forster 
— Dr.  Carlyle — Publication  of  First  Two  Volumes  of 
Carlyle's  Life — The  Storm  of  Protest — Carlyle's  Life 
in  London  —Professor  Norton  .  .  .  .-  .  .  288 

CHAPTER    IX 

BOOKS    AND   TRAVEL 

Ccesav — Lady  Derby  —  Monograph  on  Bunyan  —  Cardinal 
Newman — In  South  Africa  again — Australia,  New 
Zealand,  and  America  visited — The  West-Indian  Tour — 
Oceana — The  English  in  the  West  Indies — The  Two 
Chiefs  of  Dunboy — Life  of  Lord  Beaconsfield — Sea 
Studies  .  .  .  . 337 

CHAPTER    X 

THE    OXFORD    PROFESSORSHIP 

Freeman's  Death — Lord  Salisbury — Regius  Professorship 
of  Modern  History — Life  at  Oxford — Popularity  and 
Success  of  Lectures — Sir  John  Skelton — William  Froude 
— The  Council  of  Trent — English  Seamen  of  the  Sixteenth 
Century — Erasmus 381 

CHAPTER    XI 

THE    END 

Cherwell  Edge — Oxford — The  Last  Lecture — The  Life  and 
Letters  of  Erasmus — Failure  of  Health — Lord  Ducie — 
Sir  George  Grey — Last  Days — Death — The  Man,  the 
Historian,  and  the  Biographer  «  .  .  .  .413 

INDEX  447 


LIFE   OF   FROUDE 


CHAPTER    I 

CHILDHOOD 

IN  reading  biographies  I  always  skip  the  gene- 
alogical details.  To  be  born  obscure  and 
to  die  famous  has  been  described  as  the  acme  of 
human  felicity.  However  that  may  be,  whether 
fame  has  anything  to  do  with  happiness  or  no,  it 
is  a  man  himself,  and  not  his  ancestors,  whose  life 
deserves,  if  it  does  deserve,  to  be  written.  Such 
was  Froude's  own  opinion,  and  it  is  the  opinion 
of  most  sensible  people.  Few,  indeed,  are  the 
families  which  contain  more  than  one  remarkable 
figure,  and  this  is  the  rock  upon  which  the  here- 
ditary principle  always  in  practice  breaks.  For 
human  lineage  is  not  subject  to  the  scientific  tests 
which  alone  could  give  it  solid  value  as  positive 
or  negative  evidence.  There  is  nothing  to  show 
from  what  source,  other  than  the  ultimate  source 
of  every  good  and  perfect  gift,  Froude  derived 
his  brilliant  and  splendid  powers.  He  was  a 
(2310)  i 


2  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

gentleman,  and  he  did  not  care  to  find  or  make 
for  himself  a  pedigree.  He  knew  that  the  Froudes 
had  been  settled  in  Devonshire  time  out  of  mind 
as  yeomen  with  small  estates,  and  that  one  of 
them,  to  whom  his  own  father  always  referred 
with  contempt,  had  bought  from  the  Heralds' 
College  what  Gibbon  calls  the  most  useless  of  all 
coats,  a  coat  of  arms.  Froude's  grandfather  did 
a  more  sensible  thing  by  marrying  an  heiress, 
a  Devonshire  heiress,  Miss  Hurrell,  and  thereby 
doubling  his  possessions.  Although  he  died  be- 
fore he  was  five-and-twenty,  he  left  four  children 
behind  him,  and  his  only  son  was  the  historian's 
father. 

James  Anthony  Froude,  known  as  Anthony  to 
those  who  called  him  by  his  Christian  name,  was 
born  at  Dartington,  two  miles  from  Totnes,  on 
St.  George's  Day,  Shakespeare's  birthday,  the 
23rd  of  April,  1818.  His  father,  who  had  taken  a 
pass  degree  at  Oxford,  and  had  then  taken  orders, 
was  by  that  time  Rector  of  Dartington  and 
Archdeacon  of  Totnes.  Archdeacon  Froude  be- 
longed to  a  type  of  clergyman  now  almost  extinct 
in  the  Church  of  England,  though  with  strong 
idiosyncrasies  of  his  own.  Orthodox  without 
being  spiritual,  he  was  a  landowner  as  well  as  a 
parson,  a  high  and  dry  Churchman,  an  active 
magistrate,  a  zealous  Tory,  with  a  solid  and  un- 
clerical  income  of  two  or  three  thousand  a  year. 
He  was  a  personage  in  the  county,  as  well  as  a 
dignitary  of  the  Church.  Every  one  in  Devon- 


CHILDHOOD  3 

shire  knew  the  name  of  Froude,  if  only  from 
"  Parson  Froude,"  no  credit  to  his  cloth,  who 
appears  as  Parson  Chowne  in  Blackmore's  once 
popular  novel,  The  Maid  of  Sker.  But  the 
Archdeacon  was  a  man  of  blameless  life,  and 
not  in  the  least  like  Parson  Froude.  A  hard 
rider  and  passionately  fond  of  hunting,  he  was 
a  good  judge  of  a  horse  and  usually  the  best 
mounted  man  in  the  field.  One  of  his  exploits 
as  an  undergraduate  was  to  jump  the  turn- 
pike gate  on  the  Abingdon  road  with  pennies 
under  his  seat,  between  his  knees  and  the  saddle, 
and  between  his  feet  and  the  stirrups,  without 
dropping  one. 

Although  he  had  been  rather  extravagant  and 
something  of  a  dandy,  he  was  able  to  say  that  he 
could  account  for  every  sixpence  he  spent  after  the 
age  of  twenty-one.  On  leaving  Oxford  he  settled 
down  to  the  life  of  a  country  parson  with  con- 
scientious thoroughness,  and  was  reputed  the 
best  magistrate  in  the  South  Hams.  Farming 
his  own  glebe,  as  he  did,  with  skill  and  knowledge, 
perpetually  occupied,  as  he  was,  with  clerical 
or  secular  business,  he  found  the  Church  of 
England,  not  then  disturbed  by  any  wave  of 
enthusiasm,  at  once  necessary  and  sufficient 
to  his  religious  sense.  His  horror  of  Noncon- 
formists was  such  that  he  would  not  have  a  copy 
of  The  Pilgrim's  Progress  in  his  house.  He  up- 
held the  Bishop  and  all  established  institutions, 
believing  that  the  way  to  heaven  was  to  turn  to 


4  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

the  right  and  go  straight  on.     There  were  many 
such  clergymen  in  his  day. 

In  appearance  he  was  a  cold,  hard,  stern  man, 
despising  sentiment,  reticent  and  self -restrained. 
But  beneath  the  surface  there  lay  deep  emotions 
and  an  aesthetic  sense,  of  which  his  drawings  were 
the  only  outward  sign.  To  these  sketches  he 
himself  attached  no  value.  "  You  can  buy  better 
at  the  nearest  shop  for  sixpence,"  he  would  say, 
if  he  heard  them  praised.  Yet  good  judges 
of  art  compared  them  with  the  early  sketches 
of  Turner,  and  Ruskin  afterwards  gave  them 
enthusiastic  praise.  Mr.  Froude  had  married, 
when  quite  a  young  man,  Margaret  Spedding, 
the  daughter  of  an  old  college  friend,  from 
Armathwaite  in  Cumberland.  Her  nephew  is 
known  as  the  prince  of  Baconian  scholars  and 
the  J.  S.  of  Tennyson's  poem.  She  was  a  woman 
of  great  beauty,  deeply  religious,  belonging  to 
a  family  more  strongly  given  to  letters  and 
to  science  than  the  Froudes,  whose  tastes  were 
rather  for  the  active  life  of  sport  and  adven- 
ture. One  can  imagine  the  Froudes  of  the  six- 
teenth century  manning  the  ships  of  Queen  Bess 
and  sailing  with  Frobisher  or  Drake.  For  many 
years  Mrs.  Froude  was  the  mistress  of  a  happy 
home,  the  mother  of  many  handsome  sons  and 
fair  daughters.  The  two  eldest,  Hurrell  and 
Robert,  were  especially  striking,  brilliant  lads, 
popular  at  Eton,  their  father's  companions  in 
the  hunting-field  or  on  the  moors.  But  in  Darting- 


CHILDHOOD  5 

ton  Rectory,  with  all  its  outward  signs  of  pros- 
perity and  welfare,  there  were  the  seeds  of  death. 
Before  Anthony  Froude,  the  youngest  of  eight, 
was  three  years  old,  his  mother  died  of  a  decline, 
and  within  a  few  years  the  same  illness  proved 
fatal  to  five  of  her  children.  The  whole  aspect 
of  life  at  Dartington  was  changed.  The  Arch- 
deacon retired  into  himself  and  nursed  his  grief 
in  silence,  melancholy,  isolated,  austere. 

This  irreparable  calamity  was  made  by  cir- 
cumstances doubly  calamitous.  Though  des- 
tined to  survive  all  his  brothers  and  sisters, 
Anthony  was  a  weak,  sickly  child,  not  considered 
likely  to  grow  up.  From  his  father's  lips  he 
never  heard  the  mention  of  his  mother's  name, 
nor  was  the  Archdeacon  himself  capable  of 
showing  any  tenderness  whatever.  In  place  of 
a  mother  the  little  boy  had  an  aunt,  who  applied 
to  him  principles  of  Spartan  severity.  At  the 
mature  age  of  three  he  was  ducked  every  morning 
at  a  trough,  to  harden  him,  in  the  ice-cold  water 
from  a  spring,  and  whenever  he  was  naughty 
he  was  whipped.  It  may  have  been  from  this 
unpleasant  discipline  that  he  derived  the  contempt 
for  self-indulgence,  and  the  indifference  to  pain, 
which  distinguished  him  in  after  life.  On  the 
other  hand,  he  was  allowed  to  read  what  he  liked, 
and  devoured  Grimm's  Tales,  The  Seven  Cham- 
pions of  Christendom,  and  The  Arabian  Nights. 
He  was  an  imaginative  and  reflective  child,  full 
of  the  wonder  in  which  philosophy  begins. 


6  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

The  boy  felt  from  the  first  the  romantic  beauty 
of  his  home.  Dartington  Rectory,  some  two  miles 
from  Totnes,  is  surrounded  by  woods  which  over- 
hang precipitously  the  clear  waters  of  the  River 
Dart.  Dartington  Hall,  which  stood  near  the 
rectory,  is  one  of  the  oldest  houses  in  England, 
originally  built  before  the  Conquest,  and  com- 
pleted with  great  magnificence  in  the  reign  of 
Richard  II.  The  vast  banqueting-room  was,  in  the 
nineteenth  century,  a  ruin,  and  open  to  the  sky. 
The  remains  of  the  old  quadrangle  were  a  treasure 
to  local  antiquaries,  and  the  whole  place  was  full 
of  charm  for  an  imaginative  boy.  Mr.  Champer- 
nowne,  the  owner,  was  an  intimate  friend  of  the 
Archdeacon,  to  whom  he  left  the  guardianship 
of  his  children,  so  that  the  Froudes  were  as  much 
at  home  in  their  squire's  house  as  in  the  parsonage 
itself.  Although  most  of  his  brothers  and  sisters 
were  too  old  to  be  his  companions,  the  group  in 
which  his  first  years  were  passed  was  an  unusually 
spirited  and  vivacious  one.  Newman,  who  was 
one  of  Hurr ell's  visitors  from  Oxford,  has  described 
the  young  girls  "  blooming  and  in  high  spirits,"  l 
full  of  gaiety  and  charm. 

The  Froudes  were  a  remarkable  family.  They 
had  strong  characters  and  decided  tastes,  but 
they  had  not  their  father's  conventionality  and 
preference  for  the  high  roads  of  life.  They  were 
devoted  to  sport,  and  at  the  same  time  abounded 
in  mental  vigour.  All  the  brothers  had  the  gift 

1  Newman's  Letters  and  Correspondence,  ii.  73. 


CHILDHOOD  7 

of  drawing.  John,  though  forced  into  a  lawyer's 
office,  would  if  left  to  himself  have  become  an 
artist  by  profession:  The  nearest  to  Anthony  in 
age  was  William,  afterwards  widely  celebrated  as 
a  naval  engineer.  Then  came  Robert,  the  most 
attractive  of  the  boys.  A  splendid  athlete, 
compared  by  Anthony  with  a  Greek  statue,  he 
had  sweetness  as  well  as  depth  of  nature.  His 
drawings  of  horses  were  the  delight  of  his  family  ; 
and  when  his  favourite  hunter  died  he  wrote  a 
graceful  elegy  on  the  afflicting  event.  The  in- 
fluence of  his  genial  kindness  was  never  forgotten 
by  his  youngest  brother  ;  but  there  was  a  stronger 
and  more  dominating  personality  of  which  the 
effect  was  less  beneficial  to  a  sensitive  and  nervous 
child. 

Richard  Hurrell  Froude  is  regarded  by  High 
Churchmen  as  an  originator  of  the  Oxford  Move- 
ment, and  he  impressed  all  his  contemporaries 
by  the  brilliancy  of  his  gifts.  Dean  Church 
went  so  far  as  to  compare  him  with  Pascal. 
But  his  ideas  of  bringing  up  children  were 
naturally  crude,  and  his  treatment  of  Anthony 
was  more  harsh  than  wise.  His  early  character 
as  seen  at  home  is  described  by  his  mother  in  a 
letter  written  a  year  before  her  death,  when  he 
was  seventeen.  Fond  as  she  was  of  him  and 
proud  of  his  brilliant  promise,  she  did  not  know 
what  to  make  of  him,  so  wayward  was  he  and 
inconsiderately  selfish.  "  I  am  in  a  wretched  state 
of  health,"  the  poor  lady  explained,  "  and  quiet 


8  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

is  important  to  my  recovery  and  quite  essential  to 
my  comfort,  yet  he  disturbs  it  for  what  he  calls 
'  funny  tormenting/  without  the  slightest  feeling, 
twenty  times  a  day.  At  one  time  he  kept  one  of 
his  brothers  screaming,  from  a  sort  of  teasing  play, 
for  near  an  hour  under  my  window.  At  another 
he  acted  a  wolf  to  his  baby  brother,  whom  he  had 
promised  never  to  frighten  again."  l 

Anthony  was  the  baby  brother,  and  though 
this  form  of  teasing  was  soon  given  up,  the 
temper  which  dictated  it  remained.  Hurrell,  it 
should  be  said,  inflicted  severe  discipline  upon 
himself  to  curb  his  own  refractory  nature.  In 
applying  the  same  to  his  little  brother  he  showed 
that  he  did  not  understand  the  difference  between 
Anthony's  character  and  his  own.  But  lack  of 
insight  and  want  of  sympathy  were  among  Hurr ell's 
acknowledged  defects. 

Conceiving  that  the  child  wanted  spirit,  Hurrell 
once  took  him  up  by  the  heels,  and  stirred  with  his 
head  the  mud  at  the  bottom  of  a  stream.  Another 
time  he  threw  him  into  deep  water  out  of  a  boat 
to  make  him  manly.  But  he  was  not  satisfied 
by  inspiring  physical  terror.  Invoking  the  aid 
of  the  praeternatural,  he  taught  his  brother  that 
the  hollow  behind  the  house  was  haunted  by  a 
monstrous  and  malevolent  phantom,  to  which, 
in  the  plenitude  of  his  imagination,  he  gave  the 
name  of  Peningre.  Gradually  the  child  dis- 
covered that  Peningre  was  an  illusion,  and  began 

1  Guiney's  Hurrell  Froude,  p.  8. 


CHILDHOOD  9 

to  suspect  that  other  ideas  of  Hurrell's  might  be 
illusions  too.  Superstition  is  the  parent  of  scep- 
ticism from  the  cradle  to  the  grave.  At  the  same 
time  his  own  faculty  of  invention  was  rather 
stimulated  than  repressed.  He  was  encouraged 
in  telling,  as  children  will,  imaginative  stories  of 
things  which  never  occurred. 

In  spite  of  ghosts  and  muddy  water  Anthony 
worshipped  Hurrell,  a  born  leader  of  men,  who 
had  a  fascination  for  his  brothers  and  sisters, 
though  not  perhaps  of  the  most  wholesome 
kind.  The  Archdeacon  himself  had  no  crotchets. 
He  was  a  religious  man,  to  whom  religion 
meant  duty  rather  than  dogma,  a  light  to 
the  feet,  and  a  lantern  for  the  path.  A  Tory 
and  a  Churchman,  he  was  yet  a  moderate  Tory 
and  a  moderate  Churchman  ;  prudent,  sensible, 
a  man  of  the  world.  To  Hurrell  Dissenters  were 
rogues  and  idiots,  a  Liberal  was  half  an  infidel, 
a  Radical  was,  at  least  in  intention,  a  thief.  From 
the  effect  of  this  nonsense  Anthony  was  saved 
for  a  time  by  his  first  school.  At  the  age  of  nine  he 
was  sent  to  Buckfastleigh,  five  miles  up  the  River 
Dart,  where  Mr.  Lowndes,  the  rector  and  patron 
of  the  living,  took  boarders  and  taught  them, 
mostly  Devonshire  boys.  Buckfastleigh  was  not 
a  bad  school  for  the  period.  There  was  plenty 
of  caning,  but  no  bullying,  and  Latin  was  well 
taught.  Froude  was  a  gentle,  amiable  child, 
"  such  a  very  good-tempered  little  fellow  that,  in 
spite  of  his  sawneyness,  he  is  sure  to  be  liked," 


io  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

as  his  eldest  brother  wrote  in  1828.  He  suffered 
at  this  time  from  an  internal  weakness,  which 
made  games  impossible.  His  passion,  which  he 
never  lost,  was  for  Greek,  and  especially  for 
Homer.  With  a  precocity  which  Mill  or  Macaulay 
might  have  envied,  he  had  read  both  the  Iliad 
and  the  Odyssey  twice  before  he  was  eleven. 
The  standard  of  accuracy  at  Buckfastleigh  was 
not  high,  and  Froude's  scholarship  was  inexact. 
What  he  learnt  there  was  to  enjoy  Homer,  to  feel 
on  friendly  terms  with  the  Greeks  and  Trojans, 
at  ease  with  the  everlasting  wanderer  in  the  best 
story-book  composed  by  man.  Anthony's  holi- 
days were  not  altogether  happy.  He  was  made 
to  work  instead  of  amusing  himself,  and  forced 
into  an  unwholesome  precocity.  Then  at  eleven 
he  was  sent  to  Westminster. 

In  1830  the  reputation  of  Westminster  stood 
high.  The  boarding-houses  were  well  managed, 
the  fagging  in  them  was  light,  and  their  tone  was 
good.  Unhappily,  in  spite  of  the  head  master's 
remonstrances,  Froude's  father,  who  had  spent  a 
great  deal  of  money  on  his  other  sons'  education, 
insisted  on  placing  him  in  college,  which  was  then 
far  too  rough  for  a  boy  of  his  age  and  strength. 
On  account  of  what  he  had  read,  rather  than  what 
he  had  learnt,  at  Buckfastleigh,  he  took  a  very 
high  place,  and  was  put  with  boys  far  older  than 
himself.  The  fagging  was  excessively  severe.  The 
bullying  was  gross  and  unchecked.  The  sanitary 
accommodation  was  abominable.  The  language 


CHILDHOOD  ii 

of  the  dormitory  was  indecent  and  profane. 
Froude,  whose  health  prevented  him  from  the 
effective  use  of  nature's  weapons,  was  woke  by 
the  hot  points  of  cigars  burning  holes  in  his  face, 
made  drunk  by  being  forced  to  swallow  brandy 
punch,  and  repeatedly  thrashed.  He  was  also 
more  than  half  starved,  because  the  big  fellows 
had  the  pick  of  the  joints  at  dinner,  and  left  the 
small  fellows  little  besides  the  bone.  Ox- tail 
soup  at  the  pastrycook's  took  the  place  of  a  meal 
which  the  authorities  were  bound  to  provide. 
Scandalous  as  all  this  may  have  been,  it  was  not 
peculiar  to  Westminster.  The  state  of  college 
at  Winchester,  and  at  Eton,  was  in  many  respects 
as  bad.  Public  schools  had  not  yet  felt  the 
influence  of  Arnold  and  of  the  reforming  spirit. 
Head  masters  considered  domestic  details  beneath 
them,  and  parents,  if  they  felt  any  responsibility 
at  all,  persuaded  themselves  that  boys  were  all 
the  better  for  roughing  it  as  a  preparation  for 
the  discipline  of  the  world.  The  case  of  Froude, 
however,  was  a  peculiarly  bad  one.  He  was 
suffering  from  hernia,  and  the  treatment  might 
well  have  killed  him.  Although  his  fagging  only 
lasted  for  a  year,  he  was  persistently  bullied  and 
tormented,  until  he  forgot  what  he  had  learned, 
instead  of  adding  to  it.  When  the  body  is  starved 
and  ill-treated,  the  mind  will  not  work.  The 
head  master,  Dr.  Williamson,  was  disappointed 
in  a  boy  of  whom  he  had  expected  so  much, 
and  wrote  unfavourable  reports.  After  enduring 


12  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

undeserved  and  disabling  hardships  for  three  years 
and  a  half,  Froude  was  taken  away  from  West- 
minster at  the  age  of  fifteen. 

To  escape  from  such  a  den  of  horrors  was  at 
first  a  relief.  But  he  soon  found  that  his  miseries 
were  not  over.  He  came  home  in  disgrace.  His 
misfortunes  were  regarded  as  his  faults,  and  the 
worst  construction  was  put  upon  everything  he 
said  or  did.  His  clothes  and  books  had  been 
freely  stolen  in  the  big,  unregulated  dormitory. 
He  was  accused  of  having  pawned  them,  and  his 
denials  were  not  believed.  If  he  had  had  a 
mother,  all  might  have  been  well,  for  no  woman 
with  a  heart  would  assume  that  her  child  was 
lying.  The  Archdeacon,  without  a  particle  of  evi- 
dence, assumed  it  at  once,  and  beat  the  wretched 
boy  severely  in  the  presence  of  the  approving 
Hurrell.  Hurrell  would  have  made  an  excellent 
inquisitor.  His  brother  always  spoke  of  him 
as  peculiarly  gifted  in  mind  and  in  character  ; 
but  he  knew  little  of  human  nature,  and  he 
doubtless  fancied  that  in  torturing  Anthony's 
body  he  was  helping  Anthony's  soul.  To 
alter  two  words  in  the  fierce  couplet  of  the 
satirist, 

He  said  his  duty,  both  to  man  and  God, 
Required  such  conduct,  which  seemed  very  odd. 

Anthony  was  threatened,  in  the  true  inquisitorial 
spirit,  with  a  series  of  floggings,  until  he  should 
confess  what  he  had  not  done.  At  last,  however, 


CHILDHOOD  13 

he  was  set  down  as  incorrigibly  stupid,  and  given 
up  as  a  bad  job.  The  Archdeacon  arrived  at  the 
conclusion  that  his  youngest  son  was  a  fool,  and 
might  as  well  be  apprenticed  to  a  tanner.  Having 
hoped  that  he  would  be  off  his  hands  as  a  student 
of  Christ  Church  at  sixteen,  he  was  bitterly  dis- 
appointed, and  took  no  pains  to  conceal  his 
disappointment . 

To  Anthony  himself  it  seemed  a  matter  of 
indifference  what  became  of  him,  and  a  hope- 
less mystery  why  he  had  been  brought  into 
the  world.  He  had  no  friend.  The  consumption 
in  the  family  was  the  boy's  only  hope.  His 
mother  had  died  of  it,  and  his  brother  Robert, 
who  had  been  kind  to  him,  and  taught  him  to 
ride.  It  was  already  showing  itself  in  Hurrell. 
His  own  time  could  not,  he  thought,  be  long. 
Meanwhile,  he  was  subjected  to  petty  humiliations, 
in  which  the  inventive  genius  of  Hurrell  may  be 
traced.  He  was  not,  for  instance,  permitted  to 
have  clothes  from  a  tailor.  Old  garments  were 
found  in  the  house,  and  made  up  for  him  in  un- 
couth shapes  by  a  woman  in  the  village.  His 
father  seldom  spoke  to  him,  and  never  said  a  kind 
word  to  him.  By  way  of  keeping  him  quiet,  he  was 
set  to  copy  out  Barrow's  sermons.  It  is  difficult 
to  understand  how  the  sternest  disciplinarian,  being 
human,  could  have  treated  his  own  motherless 
boy  with  such  severity.  The  Archdeacon  acted,  no 
doubt,  upon  a  theory,  the  theory  that  sternness  to 
children  is  the  truest  kindness  in  the  long  run. 


14  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

Well  might  Macaulay  say  that  he  would  rather  a 
boy  should  learn  to  lisp  all  the  bad  words  in  the 
language  than  grow  up  without  a  mother.  Froude's 
interrupted  studies  were  nothing  compared  to  a 
childhood  without  love,  and  there  was  nobody  to 
make  him  feel  the  meaning  of  the  word.  Fortun- 
ately, though  his  father  was  always  at  home,  his 
brother  was  much  away,  and  he  was  a  good  deal 
left  to  himself  after  Robert's  death.  Hurrell  did 
not  disdain  to  employ  him  in  translating  John  of 
Salisbury's  letters  for  his  own  Life  of  Becket. 
No  more  was  heard  of  the  tanner,  who  had  perhaps 
been  only  a  threat.  While  he  wandered  in  soli- 
tude through  the  woods,  or  by  the  river,  his  health 
improved,  he  acquired  a  passion  for  nature,  and 
in  his  father's  library,  which  was  excellent,  he 
began  eagerly  to  read.  He  devoured  Sharon 
Turner's  History  of  England,  and  the  great  work 
of  Gibbon.  Shakespeare  and  Spenser  introduced 
him  to  the  region  of  the  spirit  in  its  highest  and 
deepest,  its  purest  and  noblest  forms.  Un- 
happily he  also  fell  in  with  Byron,  the  worst 
poet  that  can  come  into  the  hands  of  a  boy,  and 
always  retained  for  him  an  admiration  which 
would  now  be  thought  excessive.  By  these 
means  he  gained  much.  He  discovered  what 
poetry  was,  what  history  was,  and  he  learned 
also  the  lesson  that  no  one  can  teach,  the  hard 
lesson  of  self-reliance. 

This  was  the  period,  as  everybody  knows,  of 
the  Oxford  Movement,  in  which  Hurrell  Froude 


CHILDHOOD  15 

acted  as  a  pioneer.  Hurrell's  ideal  was  the  Church 
of  the  Middle  Ages  represented  by  Thomas 
Becket.  In  the  vacations  he  brought  some  of 
his  Tractarian  friends  home  with  him,  and  Anthony 
listened  to  their  talk.  Strange  talk  it  seemed. 
They  found  out,  these  young  men,  that  Dr.  Arnold, 
one  of  the  most  devoutly  religious  men  who  ever 
lived,  was  not  a  Christian.  The  Reformation 
was  an  infamous  rebellion  against  authority. 
Liberalism,  not  the  Pope,  was  Antichrist.  The 
Church  was  above  the  State,  and  the  supreme 
ruler  of  the  world.  Transubstantiation,  which 
the  Archdeacon  abhorred,  was  probably  true. 
Hurrell  Froude  was  a  brilliant  talker,  a  consum- 
mate dialectician,  and  an  ardent  proselytising 
controversialist.  But  his  young  listener  knew 
a  little  history,  and  perceived  that,  to  put  it 
mildly,  there  were  gaps  in  Hurrell's  knowledge. 
When  he  heard  that  the  Huguenots  were  de- 
spicable, that  Charles  I.  was  a  saint,  that  the  Old 
Pretender  was  James  III.,  that  the  Revolution 
of  1688  was  a  crime,  and  that  the  Non-jurors 
were  the  true  confessors  of  the  English  Church, 
it  did  not  seem  to  square  with  his  reading,  or 
his  reflections.  Perhaps,  after  all,  the  infallible 
Hurrell  might  be  wrong.  One  fear  he  had  never 
been  able  to  instil  into  his  brother,  and  that  was 
the  fear  of  death.  When  asked  what  would  hap- 
pen if  he  were  suddenly  called  to  appear  in  the 
presence  of  God,  Anthony  replied  that  he  was  in 
the  presence  of  God  from  morning  to  night  and 


16  LIFE   OF    FROUDE 

from  night  to  morning.  That  abiding  conscious- 
ness he  never  lost,  and  when  his  speculations 
went  furthest  they  invariably  stopped  there. 

Left  with  his  father  and  one  sister,  the  boy  drank 
in  the  air  of  Dartmoor,  and  grew  to  love  Devonshire 
with  an  unalterable  affection.     He  also  continued 
his  reading,  and  invaded  theology.     Newton  on 
the  Prophecies  remarked  that  "  if  the  Pope  was 
not  Antichrist,  he  had  bad  luck  to  be  so  like  him," 
and  Renan  had  not  yet  explained  that  Antichrist 
was  neither  the  Pope  nor  the  French  Revolution, 
but  the  Emperor  Nero.     From  Pearson  on   the 
Creed  he  learned  the  distinction  between   ':<  be- 
lieving "  and  "  believing  in."     When  we  believe 
in  a  person,  we  trust  him.     When  we  believe  a 
thing,  we  are  not  sure  of  it.     This  is  one  of  the 
few  theological  distinctions  which  are  also  dif- 
ferences.    Meanwhile,  the  Archdeacon  had  been 
watching  his  youngest  son,  and  had  observed  that 
he  had  at  least  a  taste  for  books.     Perhaps  he 
might  not  be  the  absolute  dolt  that  Hurrell  pro- 
nounced him.     He  had  lost  five  years,  so  far  as 
classical    training    was   concerned,   by   the    mis- 
management of  the  Archdeacon  himself.     Still,  he 
was  only  seventeen,  and  there  was  time  to  repair 
the  waste.     He  was  sent  to  a  private  tutor's  in 
preparation   for   Oxford.     His   tutor,   a   dreamy, 
poetical    High   Churchman,    devoted   to   Words- 
worth and  Keble,  failed  to  understand  his  cha- 
racter or  to  give  him  an  interest  in  his  work,  and 
a  sixth  year  was  added  to  the  lost  five. 


CHILDHOOD  17 

During  this  year  his  brother  Hurrell  died,  and 
the  tragic  extinction  of  that  commanding  spirit 
seemed  a  presage  of  his  own  early  doom.   Two  of 
his  sisters,  both  lately  married,  died  within  a  few 
months  of  Hurrell,  and  of  each  other.     The  Arch- 
deacon, incapable  of  expressing  emotion,  became 
more  reserved  than  ever,  and  scarcely  spoke  at  all. 
Sadly  was  he  disappointed  in  his  children.     Most 
of  them  went  out  of  the  world  long  before  him. 
Not  one  of  them  distinguished  himself  in  those 
regular    professional     courses    which     alone    he 
understood  as  success.     Hurrell    joined  ardently, 
while    his    life    was    spared,    in    the    effort    to 
counteract   the    Reformation  and  Romanise  the 
Church  of  England.     William,  though  he  became 
a   naval   architect   of   the    highest   possible   dis- 
tinction, and   performed  invaluable  services   for 
his   country,   worked  on   his   own   account,  and 
made  his  own  experiments  in  his  own  fashion. 
Anthony,  too,  took  his  line,  and  went  his  way, 
whither  his  genius   led   him,  indifferent   to   the 
opinion  of  the  world.     His  had  been  a  strange 
childhood,  not   without   its   redeeming   features. 
Left   to  himself,   seeing  his  brothers  and  sisters 
die  around  him,  expecting  soon  to  follow  them, 
the  boy  grew  up  stern,  hardy,  and   self-reliant. 
He   was   by   no   means   a  bookworm.      He  had 
learned  to  ride  in  the  best  mode,  by  falling  off, 
and  had   acquired   a   passion    for    fishing   which 
lasted  as  long  as  his  life.     There  were  few  better 
yachtsmen  in  England  than  Froude,  and  he  could 
(3310) 


i8  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

manage  a  boat  as  well  as  any  sailor  in  his  native 
county.  His  religious  education,  as  he  always 
said  himself,  was  thoroughly  wholesome  and 
sound,  consisting  of  morality  and  the  Bible. 
Sympathy  no  doubt  he  missed,  and  he  used  to 
regard  the  early  death  of  his  brother  Robert 
as  the  loss  of  his  best  friend.  For  his  father's 
character  he  had  a  profound  admiration  as  an 
embodiment  of  all  the  manly  virtues,  stoical  rather 
than  Christian,  never  mawkish  nor  effeminate. 


CHAPTER    II 

OXFORD 

"\  1  WESTMINSTER,  it  will  have  been  seen, 
V  V  did  less  than  nothing  for  Froude.  His 
progress  there  was  no  progress  at  all,  but  a  move- 
ment backwards,  physical  and  mental  deteriora- 
tion. He  recovered  himself  at  home,  his  father's 
coldness  and  unkindness  notwithstanding.  But 
it  was  not  until  he  went  to  Oxford  that  his 
real  intellectual  life  began,  and  that  he  realised 
his  own  powers.  In  October,  1836,  four  months 
after  Hurrell's  death,  he  came  into  residence  at 
Oriel.  That  distinguished  society  was  then  at 
the  climax  of  its  fame ;  Dr.  Hawkins  was  begin- 
ning his  long  career  as  Provost;  Newman  and 
Church  were  Fellows;  the  Oriel  Common  Room 
had  a  reputation  unrivalled  in  Oxford,  and  was 
famous  far  beyond  the  precincts  of  the  University. 
But  of  these  circumstances  Froude  thought  little, 
or  nothing.  He  felt  free.  For  the  first  time  in 
his  life  the  means  of  social  intercourse  and  enjoy- 
ment were  at  his  disposal.  His  internal  weakness 
had  been  overcome,  and  his  health,  in  spite  of  all 
he  had  gone  through,  was  good.  He  had  an  ample 
allowance,  and  facilities  for  spending  it  among 

19 


20  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

pleasant  companions  in  agreeable  ways.  He  had 
shot  up  to  his  full  height,  five  feet  eleven  inches, 
and  from  his  handsome  features  there  shone  those 
piercing  dark  eyes  which  riveted  attention  where- 
ever  they  were  turned.  His  loveless,  cheerless 
boyhood  was  over,  and  the  liberty  of  Oxford, 
which,  even  after  the  mild  constraint  of  a  public 
school,  seems  boundless,  was  to  him  the  perfection 
of  bliss.  He  began  to  develop  those  powers  of 
conversation  which  in  after  years  gave  him  an 
irresistible  influence  over  men  and  women,  young 
and  old.  Convinced  that,  like  his  brothers  and 
sisters,  he  had  but  a  short  time  to  live,  and  having 
certainly  been  full  of  misery,  he  resolved  to  make 
the  best  of  his  time,  and  enjoy  himself  while  he 
could.  He  was  under  no  obligation  to  any  one, 
unless  it  were  to  the  Archdeacon  for  his  pocket- 
money.  His  father  and  his  brother,  doubtless 
with  the  best  intentions,  had  made  life  more 
painful  for  him  after  his  mother's  death  than 
they  could  have  made  it  if  she  had  been  alive. 
But  Hurrell  was  gone,  his  father  was  in  Devonshire, 
and  he  could  do  as  he  pleased.  He  lived  with 
the  idle  set  in  college ;  riding,  boating,  and  playing 
tennis,  frequenting  wines  and  suppers.  From 
vicious  excess  his  intellect  and  temperament 
preserved  him.  Deep  down  in  his  nature  there 
was  a  strong  Puritan  element,  to  which  his  senses 
were  subdued.  Nevertheless,  for  two  years  he 
lived  at  Oxford  in  contented  idleness,  saying 
with  Isaiah,  and  more  literally  than  the  prophet, 


OXFORD  21 

"  Let  us  eat  and  drink,  for  to-morrow  we  shall 
die/' 

It  was  a  wholly  unreformed  Oxford  to  which 
Froude  came.  If  it  "  breathed  the  last  enchant- 
ments of  the  Middle  Age,"  it  was  mediaeval  in  its 
system  too,  and  the  most  active  spirits  of  the 
place,  the  leaders  of  the  Oxford  Movement,  were 
frank  reactionaries,  who  hated  the  very  name  of 
reform.  Even  a  reduction  in  the  monstrous 
number  of  Irish  Bishoprics  pertaining  to  the 
establishment  was  indignantly  denounced  as 
sacrilege,  and  was  the  immediate  cause  of  Keble's 
sermon  on  National  Apostasy  to  which  the  famous 
"  movement "  has  been  traced.  John  Henry 
Newman  was  at  that  time  residing  in  Oriel,  not 
as  a  tutor,  but  as  Vicar  of  St.  Mary's.  He  was 
kind  to  Froude  for  Hurrell's  sake,  and  introduced 
him  to  the  reading  set.  The  fascination  of  his 
character  acted  at  once  as  a  spell.  Froude 
attended  his  sermons,  and  was  fascinated  still 
more.  For  a  time,  however,  the  effect  was  merely 
aesthetic.  The  young  man  enjoyed  the  voice,  the 
eloquence,  the  thinking  power  of  the  preacher  as 
he  might  have  enjoyed  a  sonata  of  Beethoven's. 
But  his  acquaintance  with  the  reading  men  was 
not  kept  up,  and  he  led  an  idle,  luxurious  life. 
Nobody  then  dreamt  of  an  Oxford  Commission, 
and  the  Colleges,  like  the  University,  were  left  to 
themselves.  They  were  not  economically  managed, 
and  the  expenses  of  the  undergraduates  were 
heavy.  Their  battels  were  high,  and  no  check 


22  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

was  put  upon  the  bills  which  they  chose  to  run 
up  with  tradesmen.  Froude  spent  his  father's 
money,  and  enjoyed  himself.  The  dissipation  was 
not  flagrant.  He  was  never  a  sensualist,  nor  a 
Sybarite.  Even  then  he  had  a  frugal  mind,  and 
knew  well  the  value  of  money.  "  I  remember," 
he  says  in  The  Oxford  Counter-Reformation,  an 
autobiographical  essay — "  I  remember  calculating 
that  I  could  have  lived  at  a  boarding-house  on 
contract,  with  every  luxury  which  I  had  in  college, 
at  a  reduction  of  fifty  per  cent."  l  He  was  not 
given  to  coarse  indulgence,  and  idleness  was 
probably  his  worst  sin  at  Oxford.  But  his  inno- 
cence of  evil  was  not  ignorance ;  and  though 
he  never  led  a  fast  life  himself,  he  knew  perfectly 
well  how  those  lived  who  did. 

An  intellect  like  Froude' s  seldom  slumbers  long. 
He  had  to  attend  lectures,  and  his  old  love  of 
Homer  revived.  Plato  opened  a  new  world,  a 
world  which  never  grows  old,  and  becomes  fresher 
the  more  it  is  explored.  Herodotus  proved  more 
charming  than  The  Arabian  Nights.  Thucydides 
showed  how  much  wisdom  may  be  contained  in 
the  form  of  history.  Froude  preferred  Greek  to 
Latin,  and  sat  up  at  night  to  read  the  Philoctetes, 
the  only  work  of  literature  that  ever  moved  him 
to  tears.  ^Eschylus  divided  his  allegiance  with 
Sophocles.  But  the  author  who  most  completely 
mastered  him,  and  whom  he  most  completely 
mastered,  was  Pindar.  The  Olympian  Odes  seemed 

1  Short  Studies  on  Great  Subjects,  4th  series,  p.  180. 


OXFORD  23 

to  him  like  the  Elgin  Marbles  in  their  serene 
and  unapproachable  splendour.  All  this  classical 
reading,  though  it  cannot  have  been  fruitless,  was 
not  done  systematically  for  the  schools.  Froude 
had  no  ambition,  believing  that  he  should  soon 
die.  But  a  reading-party  during  the  Long  Vaca- 
tion of  1839  resulted  in  an  engagement,  which 
changed  the  course  of  his  life. 

Hitherto  he  had  been  under  the  impression  that 
nobody  cared  for  him  at  all,  and  that  it  mattered 
not  what  became  of  him.  The  sense  of  being 
valued  by  another  person  made  him  value  him- 
self. He  became  ambitious,  and  worked  hard  for 
his  degree.  He  remembered  how  the  master  of 
his  first  school  had  prophesied  that  he  would  be 
a  Bishop.  He  did  not  want  to  be  a  Bishop,  but 
he  began  to  think  that  such  grandeur  would  not 
have  been  predicted  of  a  fool.  Abandoning  his 
idle  habits,  he  read  night  and  day  that  he  might 
distinguish  himself  in  the  young  lady's  eyes.  After 
six  months  her  father  interfered.  He  had  no  con- 
fidence in  the  stability  of  this  very  young  suitor's 
character,  and  he  put  an  end  to  the  engagement. 
Froude  was  stunned  by  the  blow,  and  gave  up 
all  hope  of  a  first  class.  In  any  case  there  would 
have  been  difficulties.  His  early  training  in 
scholarship  had  not  been  accurate,  and  he  suffered 
from  the  blunders  of  his  education.  But  under 
the  influence  of  excitement  he  had  so  far  made 
up  for  lost  time  that  he  got,  like  Hurrell,  a 
second  class  in  the  final  classical  schools.  His 


24  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

qualified  success  gave  him,  no  satisfaction.  He 
was  suffering  from  a  bitter  sense  of  disappoint- 
ment and  wrong.  It  seemed  to  him  that  he 
was  marked  out  for  misfortune,  and  that  there 
was  no  one  to  help  him  or  to  take  any  trouble 
about  him.  Thrown  back  upon  himself,  however, 
he  conquered  his  discouragement  and  resolved 
that  he  would  be  the  master  of  his  fate. 

It  was  in  the  year  1840  that  Froude  took  his 
degree.  Newman  was  then  at  the  height  of  his 
power  and  influence.  The  Tracts  for  the  Times, 
which  Mrs.  Browning  in  Aurora  Leigh  calls  "  tracts 
against  the  times,"  were  popular  with  under- 
graduates, and  High  Churchmen  were  making 
numerous  recruits.  Newman's  sermons  are  still 
read  for  their  style.  But  we  can  hardly  imagine 
the  effect  which  they  produced  when  they  were 
delivered.  The  preacher's  unrivalled  command 
of  English,  his  exquisitely  musical  voice,  his  utter 
unworldliness,  the  fervent  evangelical  piety  which 
his  high  Anglican  doctrine  did  not  disturb,  were 
less  moving  than  his  singular  power,  which  he 
seemed  to  have  derived  from  Christ  Himself, 
of  reading  the  human  heart.  The  young  men 
who  listened  to  him  felt,  each  of  them,  as  if  he 
had  confessed  his  inmost  thoughts  to  Newman, 
as  if  Newman  were  speaking  to  him  alone.  And 
yet,  from  his  own  point  of  view,  there  was  a 
danger  in  his  arguments,  a  danger  which  he  pro- 
bably did  not  see  himself,  peculiarly  insidious  to 
an  acute,  subtle,  speculative  mind  like  Froude's. 


OXFORD  25 

Newman's  intellect,  when  left  to  itself,  was  so 
clear,  so  powerful,  so  intense,  that  it  cut  through 
sophistry  like  a  knife,  and  went  straight  from 
premisses  to  conclusion.  But  it  was  only  left 
to  itself  within  narrow  and  definite  limits.  He 
never  suffered  from  religious  doubts.  From  Evan- 
gelical Protestantism  to  Roman  Catholicism  he 
passed  by  slow  degrees  without  once  entering  the 
domain  of  scepticism.  Dissenting  altogether  from 
Bishop  Butler's  view  that  reason  is  the  only  faculty 
by  which  we  can  judge  even  of  revelation,  he  set 
religion  apart,  outside  reason  altogether.  From 
the  pulpit  of  St.  Mary's  he  told  his  congregation 
that  Hume's  argument  against  miracles  was 
logically  sound.  It  was  really  more  probable 
that  the  witnesses  should  be  mistaken  than  that 
Lazarus  should  have  been  raised  from  the  dead. 
But,  all  the  same,  Lazarus  was  raised  from  the 
dead  :  we  were  required  by  faith  to  believe  it,  and 
logic  had  nothing  to  do  with  the  matter.  How 
Butler  would  have  answered  Hume,  Butler  to 
whom  probability  was  the  guide  of  life,  we  cannot 
tell.  Newman's  answer  was  not  satisfactory  to 
Froude.  If  Hume  were  right,  how  could  he  also 
be  wrong  ?  Newman  might  say,  with  Tertullian, 
Credo  quia  impossibile.  But  mankind  in  general 
are  not  convinced  by  paradox,  and  "to  be  sud- 
denly told  that  the  famous  argument  against 
miracles  was  logically  valid  after  all  was  at  least 
startling."  * 

1  Short  Studies  on  Great  Subjects,  4th  series,  p.  205, 


26  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

Perplexed  by  this  dilemma,  Froude  remained 
at  Oxford  as  a  graduate,  taking  pupils  in  what 
was  then  called  science,  and  would  now  be  called 
philosophy,  for  the  Honour  School  of  Litercz 
Humaniores.  He  was  soon  offered,  and  accepted, 
a  tutorship  in  Ireland.  His  pupil's  father,  Mr. 
Cleaver,  was  rector  of  Delgany  in  the  county  of 
Wicklow.  Mr.  Cleaver  was  a  dignified,  stately 
clergyman  of  the  Evangelical  school.  Froude  had 
been  taught  by  his  brother  at  home,  and  by  his 
friends  at  Oxford,  to  despise  Evangelicals  as  silly, 
ignorant,  ridiculous  persons.  He  saw  in  Mr. 
Cleaver  the  perfect  type  of  a  Christian  gentleman, 
cultivated,  pious,  and  well  bred.  Mrs.  Cleaver  was 
worthy  of  her  husband.  They  were  both  models  of 
practical  Christianity.  They  and  their  circle  held 
all  the  opinions  about  Catholicism  and  the  Refor- 
mation which  Newman  and  the  Anglo-Catholics 
denounced.  The  real  thing  was  always  among 
them,  and  they  did  not  want  any  imitation.  "  A 
clergyman,"  says  Froude,  "  who  was  afterwards 
a  Bishop  in  the  Irish  Church,  declared  in  my 
hearing  that  the  theory  of  a  Christian  priesthood 
was  a  fiction  ;  that  the  notion  of  the  Sacraments 
as  having  a  mechanical  efficacy  irrespective  of 
their  conscious  effect  upon  the  mind  of  the  re- 
ceiver was  an  idolatrous  superstition  ;  that  the 
Church  was  a  human  institution,  which  had  varied 
in  form  in  different  ages,  and  might  vary  again  ; 
that  it  was  always  fallible  ;  that  it  might  have 
Bishops  in  England,  and  dispense  with  Bishops 


OXFORD  27 

in  Scotland  and  Germany  ;  that  a  Bishop  was 
merely  an  officer  ;  that  the  apostolical  succession 
was  probably  false  as  a  fact — and,  if  a  fact,  im- 
plied nothing  but  historical  continuity.  Yet  the 
man  who  said  these  things  had  devoted  his  whole 
life  to  his  Master's  service — thought  of  nothing 
else,  and  cared  for  nothing  else."  l 

Froude  had  been  taught  by  his  brother,  and  his 
brother's  set,  to  believe  that  Dissenters  were, 
morally  and  intellectually,  the  scum  of  the  earth. 
Here  were  men  who,  though  not  Dissenters  them- 
selves, held  doctrines  practically  indistinguishable 
from  theirs,  and  yet  united  the  highest  mental 
training  with  the  service  of  God  and  the  imitation 
of  Christ.  There  was  in  the  Cleaver  household 
none  of  that  reserve  which  the  Tractarians  in- 
culcated in  matters  of  religion.  The  Christian 
standard  was  habitually  held  up  as  the  guide  of 
life  and  conduct,  an  example  to  be  always  followed 
whatever  the  immediate  consequences  that  might 
ensue.  Mr.  Cleaver  was  a  man  of  moderate  for- 
tune, who  could  be  hospitable  without  pinching, 
and  he  was  acquainted  with  the  best  Protestant 
society  in  Ireland.  Public  affairs  were  discussed 
in  his  house  with  full  knowledge,  and  without  the 
frivolity  affected  by  public  men.  O'Connell  was 
at  that  time  supreme  in  the  government  of  Ireland, 
though  his  reign  was  drawing  to  a  close.  The 
Whigs  held  office  by  virtue  of  a  compact  with  the 
Irish  leader,  and  their  Under-Secretary  at  Dublin 

1  Short  Studies  on  Great  Subjects,  4th  series,  p.  212. 


a8  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

Castle,  Thomas  Drummond,  had  gained  the  affec- 
tions of  the  people  by  his  sympathetic  states- 
manship. An  epigrammatic  speaker  said  in  the 
House  of  Commons  that  Peel  governed  England, 
O'Connell  governed  Ireland,  and  the  Whigs 
governed  Downing  Street.  It  was  all  coming 
to  an  end.  Drummond  died,  the  Whigs  went  out 
of  office,  Peel  governed  Ireland,  and  England  too. 
Froude  just  saw  the  last  phase  of  O'Connellism, 
and  he  did  not  like  it.  In  politics  he  never  looked 
very  far  below  the  surface  of  things,  and  the 
wrongs  of  Ireland  did  not  appeal  to  him.  That 
Protestantism  was  the  religion  of  the  English  pale, 
and  of  the  Scottish  Presbyterians  in  Ulster,  not 
of  the  Irish  people,  was  a  fact  outside  his  thoughts. 
He  saw  two  things  clearly  enough.  One  was  the 
strength  and  beauty  of  the  religious  faith  by  which 
the  Cleavers  and  their  friends  lived.  The  other 
was  the  misery,  squalor,  and  chronic  discontent 
of  the  Catholic  population,  then  almost  twice  as 
large  as  after  the  famine  it  became.  He  did  not 
pause  to  reflect  upon  what  had  been  done  by  laws 
made  in  England,  or  upon  the  iniquity  of  taxing 
Ireland  in  tithes  for  the  Church  of  a  small  minority. 
He  concluded  simply  that  Protestantism  meant 
progress,  and  Catholicism  involved  stagnation. 
He  heard  dark  stories  of  Ribbonism,  and  was 
gravely  assured  that  if  Mr.  Cleaver's  Catholic 
coachman,  otherwise  an  excellent  servant,  were 
ordered  to  shoot  his  master,  he  would  obey. 
Very  likely  Mr.  Cleaver  was  right,  though  the 


OXFORD  29 

event  did  not  occur.  What  was  the  true  origin 
of  Ribbonism,  what  made  it  dangerous,  why  it 
had  the  sympathy  of  the  people,  were  questions 
which  Froude  could  hardly  be  expected  to 
answer,  inasmuch  as  they  were  not  answered  by 
Sir  Robert  Peel. 

While  Froude  was  at  Delgany  there  appeared 
the  once  famous  Tract  Ninety,  last  of  the  series, 
unless  we  are  to  reckon  Monckton  Milnes's  One 
Tract  More.  The  author  of  Tract  Ninety  was 
Newman,  and  the  ferment  it  made  was  prodigious. 
It  was  a  subtle,  ingenious,  and  plausible  attempt 
to  prove  that  the  Articles  and  other  formularies 
of  the  English  Church  might  be  honestly  inter- 
preted in  a  Catholic  sense,  as  embodying  principles 
which  the  whole  Catholic  Church  held  before  the 
Reformation,  and  held  still.  Mr.  Cleaver  and  his 
circle  were  profoundly  shocked.  To  them  Catho- 
licism meant  Roman  Catholicism,  or,  as  they 
called  it,  Popery.  If  a  man  were  not  a  Protestant, 
he  had  no  business  to  remain  in  the  United  Church 
of  England  and  Ireland.  If  he  did  remain  in  it, 
he  was  not  merely  mistaken,  but  dishonest,  and 
sophistry  could  not  purge  him  from  the  moral 
stain  of  treachery  to  the  institution  of  which  he 
was  an  officer.  Froude's  sense  of  chivalry  was 
aroused,  and  he  warmly  defended  Newman,  whom 
he  knew  to  be  as  honest  as  himself,  besides  being 
saintly  and  pure.  If  he  had  stopped  there,  all 
might  have  been  well.  Mr.  Cleaver  was  himself 
high-minded,  and  could  appreciate  the  virtue 


30  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

of  standing  up  for  an  absent  friend.  But  Froude 
went  further.  He  believed  Newman  to  be  legally 
and  historically  right.  The  Church  of  England 
was  designed  to  be  comprehensive.  Chatham 
had  spoken  of  it,  not  unfairly,  as  having  an 
Arminian  liturgy  and  Calvinist  articles.  When  the 
Book  of  Common  Prayer  assumed  its  present 
shape,  every  citizen  had  been  required  to  conform, 
and  the  policy  of  Elizabeth  was  to  exclude  no  one. 
The  result  was  a  compromise,  and  Mr.  Cleaver 
would  have  found  it  hard  to  reconcile  his  prin- 
ciples with  the  form  of  absolution  in  the  Visitation 
of  the  Sick.  This  was,  in  Mr.  Cleaver's  opinion, 
sophistry  almost  as  bad  as  Newman's,  and  Froude' s 
tutorship  came  to  an  end.  There  was  no  quarrel, 
and,  after  a  tour  through  the  south  of  Ireland, 
where  he  saw  superstition  and  irreverence,  solid 
churches,  well-fed  priests,  and  a  starving  peasantry 
in  rags,  Froude  returned  for  a  farewell  visit  to 
Delgany.  On  this  occasion  he  met  Dr.  Pusey, 
who  had  been  at  Christ  Church  with  Mr.  Cleaver, 
and  was  then  visiting  Bray.  Dr.  Pusey,  however, 
was  not  at  his  ease  He  was  told  by  a  clerical 
guest,  afterwards  a  Bishop,  with  more  freedom 
than  courtesy,  that  they  wanted  no  Popery 
brought  to  Ireland,  they  had  enough  of  their  own. 
The  sequel  is  curious.  For  while  Newman  justi- 
fied Mr.  Cleaver  by  going  over  to  Rome,  his  own 
sons,  including  Froude' s  pupil,  became  Puseyite 
clergymen  of  the  highest  possible  type. 

Froude  returned  to  Oxford  at  the  beginning 


OXFORD  31 

of  1842,  and  won  the  Chancellor's  Prize  for  an 
English  essay  on  the  influence  of  political  economy 
in  the  development  of  nations.  In  the  summer 
he  was  elected  to  a  Devonshire  Fellowship  at 
Exeter,  and  his  future  seemed  secure.  But  his 
mind  was  not  at  rest.  It  was  an  age  of  eccle- 
siastical controversy,  and  Oxford  was  the  centre 
of  what  now  seems  a  storm  in  a  teacup.  Froude 
became  mixed  up  in  it.  On  the  one  hand  was 
the  personal  influence  of  Newman,  who  raised 
more  doubts  than  he  solved.  On  the  other  hand 
Froude' s  experience  of  Evangelical  Protestantism 
in  Ireland,  where  he  read  for  the  first  time  The 
Pilgrim's  Progress,  contradicted  the  assumption 
of  the  Tractarians  that  High  Catholicity  was  an 
essential  note  of  true  religion.  Gradually  the 
young  Fellow  became  aware  that  High  Church 
and  Low  Church  did  not  exhaust  the  intellectual 
world.  He  read  Carlyle's  French  Revolution,  and 
Hero  Worship,  and  Past  and  Present.  He  read 
Emerson  too.  For  Emerson  and  Carlyle  the  Church 
of  England  did  not  exist.  Carlyle  despised  it. 
Emerson  had  probably  not  so  much  as  given  it  a 
thought  in  his  life.  But  what  struck  Froude  most 
about  them  was  that  they  dealt  with  actual  phaeno- 
mena,  with  things  and  persons  around  them,  with 
the  world  as  it  was.  They  did  not  appeal  to  tradi- 
tion, or  to  antiquity,  but  to  nature,  and  to  the 
mind  of  man.  The  French  Revolution,  then  but 
half  a  century  old,  was  interpreted  by  Cailyle  not 
as  Antichrist,  but  as  God's  judgment  upon  sin. 


3«  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

Perhaps  one  view  was  not  more  historical  than 
the  other.  But  the  first  was  groundless,  and  the 
second  had  at  least  some  evidence  in  support  of 
it.  God  may  be,  or  rather  must  be,  conceived 
to  work  through  other  instruments  besides  Chris- 
tianity. "  Neither  in  Jerusalem,  nor  on  this 
mountain,  shall  men  worship  the  Father."  Car- 
lyle  completed  what  Newman  had  begun,  and  the 
dogmatic  foundation  of  Froude's  belief  gave  way. 
The  two  greatest  geniuses  of  the  age,  as  he  always 
thought  them,  agreeing  in  little  else,  agreed  that 
Christianity  did  not  rest  upon  reason.  Then 
upon  what  did  it  rest  ?  Reason  appeals  to  every 
one.  Faith  is  the  appanage  of  a  few.  From 
Carlyle  Froude  went  to  Goethe,  then  almost  un- 
known at  Oxford,  a  true  philosopher  as  well  as  a 
great  poet,  an  example  of  dignity,  a  liberator  of 
the  human  soul. 

The  Church  as  a  profession  is  not  suitable  to  a 
man  in  Froude's  state  of  mind.  But  in  Oxford 
at  that  time  there  flourished  a  lamentable  system 
which  would  have  been  felt  to  be  irreligious  if 
the  authorities  of  the  place  had  known  what 
religion  really  was.  Most  Fellows  lost  their 
Fellowships  in  a  very  short  time  unless  they  took 
orders,  and  Froude's  Fellowship  was  in  that 
sense  a  clerical  one.  They  were  ordained  as  a 
matter  of  course,  the  Bishop  requiring  no  other 
title.  They  were  not  expected,  unless  they  wished 
it,  to  take  any  parochial  duty,  and  the  notion  that 
they  had  a  "  serious  call  "  to  keep  their  Fellow- 


OXFORD  33 

ships  can  only  be  described  as  absurd.  Froude 
had  no  other  profession  in  view,  and  he  persuaded 
himself  that  a  Church  established  by  law  must 
allow  a  wider  range  of  opinion  than  a  voluntary 
communion  could  afford  to  tolerate.  As  we  have 
seen,  he  had  defended  Tract  Ninety,  and  he 
claimed  for  himself  the  latitude  which  he  conceded 
to  Newman.  It  was  in  his  case  a  mistake,  as  he 
very  soon  discovered.  But  the  system  which 
encouraged  it  must  bear  a  large  part  of  the  blame. 
Meanwhile  he  had  been  employed  by  Newman  on 
an  uncongenial  task.  After  the  discontinuance  of 
Tracts  for  the  Times ,  Newman  projected  another 
series,  called  Lives  of  the  Saints.  The  idea  was  of 
course  taken  from  the  Bollandist  Ada  Sanctorum. 
But  Newman  had  a  definite  polemical  purpose. 
Just  as  he  felt  the  force  of  Hume's  argument 
against  the  probability  of  miracles,  so  he  realised 
the  difficulty  of  answering  Gibbon's  inquiry  when 
miracles  ceased.  Had  they  ever  ceased  at  all  ? 
Many  Roman  Catholics,  if  not  the  most  enlightened 
and  instructed,  thought  not.  Newman  con- 
ceived that 'the  lives  of  English  and  Irish  saints 
held  much  matter  for  edification,  including  marvels 
and  portents  of  various  kinds.  He  desired  that 
these  things  should  be  believed,  as  he  doubtless 
believed  them.  They  proved,  he  thought,  if  they 
could  be  proved  themselves,  that  supernatural 
power  resided  in  the  Church,  and  when  the 
Church  was  concerned  he  laid  his  reason  aside. 
He  was  extraordinarily  sanguine.  "  Rationalise," 

(2310)  Q 


34  LIFE   OF    FROUDE 

he  said  to  Froude,  "  when  the  evidence  is  weak, 
and  this  will  give  credibility  for  others,  when  you 
can  show  that  the  evidence  is  strong."  Froude 
chose  St.  Neot,  a  contemporary  of  Alfred,  in  whose 
life  the  supernatural  played  a  comparatively 
small  part.  He  told  his  story  as  legend,  not  quite 
as  Newman  wanted  it.  "  This  is  all,"  he  said  at 
the  end,  "  and  perhaps  rather  more  than  all,  that 
is  known  of  the  life  of  the  blessed  St.  Neot." 
His  connection  with  the  series  ceased.  But 
his  curiosity  was  excited.  He  read  far  and  wide 
in  the  Benedictine  biographies.  No  trace  of 
investigation  into  facts  could  he  discover.  If  a 
tale  was  edifying,  it  was  believed,  and  credibility 
had  nothing  to  do  with  it.  The  saints  were 
beatified  conjurers,  and  any  nonsense  about  them 
was  swallowed,  if  it  involved  the  miraculous  ele- 
ment. The  effect  upon  Froude  may  be  left  to 
his  own  words.  "St.  Patrick  I  found  once  lighted 
a  fire  with  icicles,  changed  a  French  marauder 
into  a  wolf,  and  floated  to  Ireland  on  an  altar 
stone.  I  thought  it  nonsense.  I  found  it  even- 
tually uncertain  whether  Patricius  was  not  a  title, 
and  whether  any  single  apostle  of  that  name  had 
so  much  as  existed." 

Froude's  scepticism  was  too  indiscriminate  when 
it  assailed  the  existence  of  St.  Patrick,  which  is 
not  now  doubted  by  scholars,  baseless  as  the 
Patrician  legends  may  be.  Colgan's  Lives  of  the 
Irish  Saints  had  taken  him  back  to  Ireland,  that 
he  might  examine  the  scenes  described.  He  visited 


OXFORD  35 

them  under  the  best  guidance  ;  and  Petre,  the 
learned  historian  of  the  Round  Towers,  showed 
him  a  host  of  curious  antiquities,  including  a 
utensil  which  had  come  to  be  called  the  Crown 
of  Brian  Boru.  Legendary  history  made  no 
impression  upon  Froude.  The  actual  state  of 
Ireland  affected  him  with  the  deepest  interest. 
A  population  of  eight  millions,  fed  chiefly  upon 
potatoes,  and  multiplying  like  rabbits,  light- 
hearted,  reckless,  and  generous,  never  grudged 
hospitality,  nor  troubled  themselves  about  paying 
their  debts.  Their  kindness  to  strangers  was  un- 
bounded. In  the  wilds  of  Mayo  Froude  caught  the 
smallpox,  and  was  nursed  with  a  devotion  which 
he  always  remembered,  ungrateful  as  in  some  of 
his  writings  about  Ireland  he  may  seem.  After 
his  recovery  he  wandered  about  the  coast,  saw 
the  station  of  Protestant  missionaries  at  Achill, 
and  was  rowed  out  to  Clare  Island,  where  a  dis- 
abled galleon  from  the  Armada  had  been  wrecked. 
His  studies  in  hagiology  led  him  to  consider 
the  whole  question  of  the  miraculous,  and  he 
found  it  impossible  to  work  with  Newman  any 
more.  A  religion  which  rested  upon  such  stories 
as  Father  Colgan's  was  a  religion  nurtured  in 
lies. 

All  this,  however,  had  nothing  to  do  with  the 
Church  of  England  by  law  established,  and 
Froude  was  ordained  deacon  in  1845.  The  same 
year  Newman  seceded,  and  was  received  into  the 
Church  of  Rome.  No  similar  event,  before  or 


36  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

since,  has  excited  such  consternation  and  alarm. 
So  impartial  an  observer  as  Mr.  Disraeli  thought 
that  the  Church  of  England  did  not  in  his  time 
recover  from  the  blow.  We  are  only  concerned 
with  it  here  as  it  affected  Froude.  It  affected 
him  in  a  way  unknown  outside  the  family.  Hur- 
rell  Froude,  who  abhorred  private  judgment  as 
a  Protestant  error,  had  told  his  brothers  that 
when  they  saw  Newman  and  Keble  disagree  they 
might  think  for  themselves.  He  felt  sure  that 
he  was  thereby  guarding  them  against  thinking 
for  themselves  at  all.  But  now  the  event  which 
he  considered  impossible  had  happened.  Newman 
had  gone  to  Rome.  Keble  remained  faithful 
to  the  Church  of  his  baptism.  Which  side  Hurrell 
Froude  would  have  taken  nobody  could  say.  He 
had  died  a  clergyman  of  the  Church  of  England 
at  the  age  of  thirty- three,  nine  years  before. 
Anthony  Froude  had  no  inclination  to  follow 
Newman.  But  neither  did  he  agree  with  Keble. 
He  thought  for  himself.  Of  his  brief  clerical 
career  there  exists  a  singular  record  in  the  shape 
of  a  funeral  sermon  preached  at  St.  Mary's 
Church,  Torquay,  on  the  second  Sunday  after 
Trinity,  1847.  The  subject  was  George  May 
Coleridge,  vicar  of  the  parish,  the  poet's 
nephew,  who  had  been  cut  off  in  the  prime  of 
life  while  Froude  acted  as  his  curate.  The 
sermon  itself  is  not  remarkable,  except  for  being 
written  in  unusually  good  English.  The  doctrine 
is  strictly  orthodox,  and  the  simple  life  of  a  good 


OXFORD  37 

clergyman  devoted  to  his  people  is  described  with 
much  tenderness  of  feeling. 

This  sermon,  of  which  he  gave  a  copy  to  John 
Duke  Coleridge,  the  future  Lord  Chief  Justice  of 
England,  was  Froude's  first  experiment  in  author- 
ship, and  it  was  at  least  harmless.  As  much 
cannot  be  said  for  the  second,  two  anonymous 
stories,  called  Shadows  of  the  Clouds  and  The 
Lieutenant's  Daughter.  The  Lieutenant's  Daughter 
has  been  long  and  deservedly  forgotten.  Shadows 
of  the  Clouds  is  a  valuable  piece  of  autobiography. 
Without  literary  merit,  without  any  quality  to 
attract  the  public,  it  gives  a  vivid  and  faithful 
account  of  the  author's  troubles  at  school  and 
at  home,  together  with  a  slight  sketch  of  his 
unfortunate  love-affair. 

Froude  was  a  born  story-teller,  with  an  irre- 
sistible propensity  for  making  books.  The  fas- 
cination which,  throughout  his  life,  he  had  for 
women  showed  itself  almost  before  he  was  out  of 
his  teens  ;  and  in  this  case  the  feeling  was  abun- 
dantly returned.  Nevertheless  he  could,  within 
a  few  years,  publish  the  whole  narrative,  changing 
only  the  names,  and  then  feel  genuine  surprise 
that  the  other  person  concerned  should  be  pained. 
He  was  not  inconsiderate.  Those  who  lived 
with  him  never  heard  from  him  a  rough  or 
unkind  word.  But  his  dramatic  instinct  was 
uncontrollable  and  had  to  be  expressed.  The 
Archdeacon  read  the  book,  and  was  naturally 
furious.  If  he  could  have  been  in  any  way 


38  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

convinced  of  his  errors,  which  may  be  doubted, 
to  publish  an  account  of  them  was  not  the  best 
way  to  begin.  Reconciliation  had  been  made 
impossible,  and  Anthony  was  left  to  his  own 
devices.  His  miscellaneous  reading  was  not 
checked  by  an  ordination  which  imposed  no  duties. 
Goethe  sent  him  to  Spinoza,  a  "  God-intoxicated 
man,"  and  a  philosophical  genius,  but  not  a  pillar  of 
ecclesiastical  orthodoxy.  Vestiges  of  Creation,which 
had  appeared  in  1844,  woke  Oxford  to  the  dis- 
covery that  physical  science  might  have  something 
to  say  about  the  origin,  or  at  least  the  growth,  of 
the  universe.  The  writer,  Robert  Chambers,  whose 
name  was  not  then  known,  so  far  anticipated 
Darwin  that  he  dispensed  with  the  necessity  for  a 
special  creation  of  each  plant  and  animal.  He  did 
not,  any  more  than  Darwin,  attack  the  Christian 
religion,  and  he  did  not  really  go  much  farther 
than  Lucretius.  But  he  had  more  modern  lights, 
he  understood  science,  and  he  wrote  in  a  popular 
style.  He  made  a  lively  impression  upon  Froude, 
who  learnt  from  him  that  natural  phenomena 
were  due  to  natural  causes,  at  the  same  time  that 
he  acquired  from  Spinoza  a  disbelief  in  the  free- 
dom of  the  will.  When  Dr.  Johnson  said,  "  Sir, 
we  know  that  the  will  is  free,  and  there's  an  end 
on't,"  he  did  not  understand  the  question.  We 
all  know  that  the  will  is  free  to  act.  But  is  man 
free  to  will  ?  If  everything  about  a  man  were 
within  our  cognisance,  we  could  predict  his  con- 
duct in  given  circumstances  as  certainly  as  a 


OXFORD  39 

chemist  can  foretell  the  effect  of  mixing  an  acid 
with  an  alkali.  I  have  no  intention  of  express- 
ing any  opinion  of  my  own  upon  this  subject. 
The  important  thing  is  that  Froude  became 
in  the  philosophic  sense  a  Determinist,  and 
his  conviction  that  Calvin  was  in  that  re- 
spect the  best  philosopher  among  theologians 
strengthened  his  attachment  to  the  Protestant 
cause. 

Protestantism  apart,  however,  Froude's  posi- 
tion as  a  clergyman  had  become  intolerable.  He 
had  been  persuaded  to  accept  ordination  for  the 
reason,  among  others,  that  the  Church  could  be 
reformed  better  from  within  than  from  without. 
But  there  were  few  doctrines  of  the  Church  that 
he  could  honestly  teach,  and  the  straightforward 
course  was  to  abandon  the  clerical  profession. 
Nowadays  a  man  in  Froude' s  plight  would  only 
have  to  sign  a  paper,  and  he  would  be  free.  But 
before  1870  orders,  even  deacon's  orders,  were 
indelible.  Neither  a  priest  nor  a  deacon  could  sit 
in  Parliament,  or  enter  any  other  learned  profes- 
sion. Froude  was  in  great  difficulty  and  distress. 
He  consulted  his  friends  Arthur  Stanley,  Matthew 
Arnold,  and  Arthur  Clough.  Clough,  though  a 
layman,  felt  the  same  perplexity  as  himself. 
As  a  Fellow  and  Tutor  of  Oriel  he  had  signed  the 
Articles.  Now  that  he  no  longer  believed  in  them, 
ought  he  not  to  give  up  his  appointments  ?  The 
Provost,  Dr.  Hawkins,  induced  him  to  pause 
and  reflect.  Meanwhile  he  published  a  volume 


40  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

of  poetry,  including  the  celebrated  Bothie,  about 
which  Froude  wrote  to  him  : 

"  I  was  for  ever  falling  upon  lines  which  gave 
me  uneasy  twitchings  ;  e.g.  the  end  of  the  love 
scene : 

"And  he  fell  at  her  feet,  and  buried  his  face  in  her 
apron. 

"  I  daresay  the  head  would  fall  there,  but 
what  an  image  !  It  chimes  in  with  your  notion 
of  the  attractiveness  of  the  working  business. 
But  our  undisciplined  ears  have  divided  the  ideas 
too  long  to  bear  to  have  them  so  abruptly  shaken 
together.  Love  is  an  idle  sort  of  a  god,  and  comes 
in  other  hours  than  the  working  ones  ;  at  least  I 
have  always  found  it  so.  I  don't  think  of  it  in 
my  working  time,  and  when  I  see  a  person  I  do 
love  working  (at  whatever  it  may  be),  I  have 
quite  another  set  of  thoughts  about  her.  ...  It 
would  do  excellently  well  for  married  affection,  for 
it  is  the  element  in  which  it  lives.  But  I  don't 
think  young  love  gets  born  then.  I  only  speak  for 
myself,  and  from  a  very  limited  experience.  As  to 
the  story,  I  don't  the  least  object  to  it  on  The 
Spectator's  ground.  I  think  it  could  not  have  been 
done  in  prose.  Verse  was  wanted  to  give  it  dig- 
nity. But  if  we  find  it  trivial,  the  fault  is  in  our 
own  varnished  selves.  We  have  been  polished  up 
so  bright  that  we  forget  the  stuff  we  are  made  of." 
Clough  was  in  politics  a  Republican,  and 
sympathised  ardently  with  the  French  Revolution 
of  1848.  So  did  Charles  Kingsley,  a  Cambridge 


OXFORD  41 

man,  who  was  at  that  time  on  a  visit  to  Exeter. 
But  Kingsley,  though  a  disciple  of  Carlyle,  was 
also  a  hard-working  clergyman,  who  held  that 
the  masses  could  be  regenerated  by  Christian 
Socialism.  Froude  had  no  faith  in  Socialism, 
nor  in  Christianity  as  the  Church  understood 
it.  In  this  year,  1848,  Emerson  also  came 
to  Oxford,  and  dined  with  Clough  at  Oriel, 
where  they  thought  him  like  Newman.  Froude 
was  already  an  admirer  of  Emerson's  essays, 
and  laid  his  case  before  the  American  moralist. 
Emerson  gave  him,  as  might  have  been  expected, 
no  practical  advice,  but  recommended  him  to 
read  the  Vedas.  Nothing  mattered  much  to 
Emerson,  who  took  the  opportunity  to  give  a 
lecture  in  London  on  the  Spiritual  Unity  of  all 
Animated  Beings.  Froude  attended  it,  and  there 
first  saw  Carlyle,  who  burst,  characteristically 
enough,  into  a  shout  of  laughter  at  the  close. 
Carlyle  loved  Emerson ;  but  the  Emersonian 
philosophy  was  to  him  like  any  other  form  of  old 
clothes,  only  rather  more  grotesque  than  most. 

In  the  Long  Vacation  of  1848  Froude  went 
alone  to  Ireland  for  the  third  time,  and  shut 
himself  up  at  Killarney.  From  Killarney  he 
wrote  a  long  account  of  himself  to  Clough  : 

"KILLARNEY,    July    1$,    1848. 

"  I  came  over  here  where  for  the  present  I  am 
all  day  in  the  woods  and  on  the  lake  and  retire 
at  night  into  an  unpleasant  hotel,  where  I  am 


42  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

sitting  up  writing  this  and  waiting  with  the  rest 
of  the  household  rather  anxiously  for  the  arrival 
of  a  fresh  wedded  pair.  Next  week  I  move 
off  across  the  lake  to  a  sort  of  lodge  of  Lord  Ken- 
mare,  where  I  have  persuaded  an  old  lady  to  take 
me  into  the  family.  I  am  going  to  live  with  them, 
and  I  am  going  to  have  her  ladyship's  own  boudoir 
to  scribble  in.  It  is  a  wild  place  enough  with 
porridge  and  potatoes  to  eat,  varied  with  what  fish 
I  may  provide  for  myself  and  arbutus  berries  if  it 
comes  to  starving.  The  noble  lord  has  been  away 
for  some  years.  They  will  put  a  deal  table  into 
the  said  boudoir  for  me,  and  if  living  under  a 
noble  roof  has  charms  for  me  I  have  that  at  least 
to  console  myself  with.  I  can't  tell  about  your 
coming.  There  may  be  a  rising  in  September,  and 
you  may  be  tempted  to  turn  rebel,  you  know ;  and 
I  don't  know  whether  you  like  porridge,  or  whether 
a  straw  bed  is  to  your — not  '  taste,'  touch  is  better, 
I  suppose.  It  is  perfectly  beautiful  here,  or  it 
v/ould  be  if  it  wasn't  for  the  swarm  of  people  about 
one  that  are  for  ever  insisting  on  one's  saying  so. 
Between  hotel-keeper  and  carmen  and  boatmen 
and  guides  that  describe  to  my  honour  the  scenery, 
and  young  girls  that  insist  on  my  honour  taking 
a  taste  of  the  goats'  milk,  and  a  thousand  other 
creatures  that  insist  on  boring  me  and  being  paid 
for  it,  I  am  really  thankful  every  night  when  I  get 
to  my  room  and  find  all  the  pieces  of  me  safe  in 
their  places.  However,  I  shall  do  very  well  when 
I  get  to  my  lodge,  and  in  the  meantime  I  am 


OXFORD  43 

contented  to  do  ill.  I  have  hopes  of  these  young 
Paddies  after  all.  I  think  they  will  have  a  fight 
for  it,  or  else  their  landlords  will  bully  the  Govern- 
ment into  strong  measures  as  they  call  them — and 
then  will  finally  disgust  whatever  there  is  left  of 
doubtful  loyalty  in  the  country  into  open  unloyalty, 
and  they  will  win  without  fighting.  There  is  the 
most  genuine  hatred  of  the  Irish  landlords  every- 
where that  I  can  remember  to  have  heard  expressed 
of  persons  or  things.  My  landlady  that  is  to  be 
next  week  told  me  she  believed  it  was  God's  doing. 
If  God  wished  the  people  should  be  stirred  up  to 
fight,  then  it  was  all  right  they  should  do  it ;  and  if 
He  didn't  will,  why  surely  then  there  would  be  no 
fighting  at  all.  I  am  not  sure  it  could  have  been 
expressed  better.  I  have  heard  horrid  stories  in 
detail  of  the  famine.  They  are  getting  historical 
now,  and  the  people  can  look  back  at  them  and  tell 
them  quietly.  It  is  very  lucky  for  us  that  we  are 
let  to  get  off  for  the  most  part  with  generalities, 
and  the  knowledge  of  details  is  left  to  those  who 
suffer  them.  I  think  if  it  was  not  so  we  should 
all  go  mad  or  shoot  ourselves. 

"  The  echoes  of  English  politics  which  come  over 
here  are  very  sickening  :  even  The  Spectator  exas- 
perates me  with  its  d — d  cold-water  cure  for  all 
enthusiasm.  When  I  see  these  beautiful  mountain 
glens,  I  quite  long  to  build  myself  a  little  den  in 
the  middle  of  them,  and  say  good-bye  to  the  world, 
with  all  its  lies  and  its  selfishness,  till  other  times. 
I  have  still  one  great  consolation  here,  and  that 


44  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

is  the  rage  and  fury  of  the  sqireens  at  the  poor 
rates ;  six  and  sixpence  in  the  pound  with  an 
estate  mortgaged  right  up  to  high-water  mark 
and  the  year's  income  anticipated  is  not  the  very 
most  delightful  prospect  possible. 

"  The  crows  are  very  fat  and  very  plenty.  They 
sit  on  the  roadside  and  look  at  you  with  a  kind  of 
right  of  property.  There  are  no  beggars — at  least, 
professional  ones.  They  were  all  starved-dead,  gone 
where  at  least  I  suppose  the  means  of  subsistence 
will  be  found  for  them.  There  is  no  begging 
or  starving,  I  believe,  in  the  two  divisions  of 
Kingdom  Come.  I  see  in  The  Spectator  the 
undergraduates  were  energetically  loyal  at  Com- 
memoration— nice  boys — and  the  dons  have  been 
snubbed  about  Guizot.  Is  there  a  chance  for 

M ?     Poor  fellow,  he  is  craving  to  be  married, 

and  ceteris  paribus  I  suppose  humanity  allows  it 
to  be  a  claim,  though  John  Mill  doesn't.  My 
wedding  party  have  not  arrived.  It  is  impossible 
not  to  feel  a  kindly  interest  in  them.  At  the 
bottom  of  all  the  agitation  a  wedding  sets  going 
in  us  all  there  is  lying,  I  think  a  kind  of  mis- 
giving, a  secret  pity  for  the  fate  of  the  poor  rose 
which  is  picked  now  and  must  forthwith  wither ; 
and  our  boisterous  jollification  is  but  an  awkward 
barely  successful  effort  at  concealing  it  Well, 
good-bye.  I  hardly  know  when  I  look  over  these 
pages  whether  to  wish  you  to  get  them  or  not. 
'  Yours  notwithstanding, 

"J.  A.  F." 


OXFORD  45 

Ireland  had  been  devastated,  far  more  than 
decimated,  by  the  famine,  and  was  simmering 
with  insurrection,  like  the  Continent  of  Europe. 
The  Corn  Laws  had  gone,  and  the  Whigs  were 
back  in  office,  but  they  could  do  nothing  with 
Ireland.  To  Froude  it  appeared  as  if  the  dis- 
turbed state  of  the  country  were  an  emblem  of 
distracted  Churches  and  outworn  creeds.  Re- 
ligion seemed  to  him  hopelessly  damaged,  and 
he  asked  himself  whether  morality  would  not 
follow  religion.  If  the  Christian  sanction  were 
lost,  would  the  difference  between  right  and 
wrong  survive  ?  His  own  state  of  mind  was 
thoroughly  wretched.  The  creed  in  which  he 
had  been  brought  up  was  giving  way  under  him, 
and  he  could  find  no  principle  of  action  at  all. 
Brooding  ceaselessly  over  these  problems,  he  at 
the  same  time  lowered  his  physical  strength  by 
abstinence,  living  upon  bread,  milk,  and  vege- 
tables, giving  up  meat  and  wine.  In  this  un- 
promising frame  of  mind,  and  in  the  course 
of  solitary  rambles,  he  composed  The  Nemesis 
of  Faith.1  The  book  is,  both  in  substance  and 
in  style,  quite  unworthy  of  Froude.  But  in 
the  life  of  a  man  who  afterwards  wrote  what  the 
world  would  not  willingly  let  die  it  is  an  epoch 
of  critical  importance.  To  describe  it  in  a  word 
is  impossible.  To  describe  it  in  a  few  words  is 
not  easy.  Froude  himself  called  it  in  after  life 
a  "  cry  of  pain,"  meaning  that  it  was  intended 

1  Chapman,  1849. 


46  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

to  relieve  the  intolerable  pressure  of  his  thoughts. 
It  is  not  a  novel,  it  is  not  a  treatise,  it  is  not 
poetry,  it  is  not  romance.  It  is  the  delineation 
of  a  mood ;  and  though  it  was  called,  with  some 
reason,  sceptical,  its  moral,  if  it  has  a  moral,  is 
that  scepticism  leads  to  misconduct.  That  un- 
pleasant and  unverified  hypothesis,  soon  rejected 
by  Froude  himself,  has  been  revived  by  M.  Bourget 
in  Le  Disciple,  and  L'Etape.  The  Nemesis  of 
Faith  is  as  unwholesome  as  either  of  these  books, 
and  has  not  their  literary  charm.  It  had  few 
friends,  because  it  disgusted  free-thinking  Liberals 
as  much  as  it  scandalised  orthodox  Conservatives. 
If  it  were  read  at  all  nowadays,  as  it  is  not,  it 
would  be  read  for  the  early  sketches  of  Newman 
and  Carlyle,  afterwards  amplified  in  memorable 
pages  which  are  not  likely  to  perish. 

In  a  letter  to  Charles  Kingsley,  written  from 
Dartington  on  New  Year's  Day,  1849,  Froude 
speaks  with  transparent  candour  of  his  book,  and 
of  his  own  mind: 

"  I  wish  to  give  up  my  Fellowship.  I  hate  the 
Articles.  I  have  said  I  hate  chapel  to  the  Rector 
himself ;  and  then  I  must  live  somehow,  and 
England  is  not  hospitable,  and  the  parties  here 
to  whom  I  am  in  submission  believe  too  devoutly 
in  the  God  of  this  world  to  forgive  an  absolute 
apostasy.  Under  pain  of  lost  favour  for  ever 
if  I  leave  my  provision  at  Oxford,  I  must  find 
another,  and  immediately.  There  are  many 
matters  I  wish  to  talk  over  with  you.  I  have  a 


OXFORD  47 

book  advertised.  You  may  have  seen  it.  It  is 
too  utterly  subjective  to  please  you.  I  can't  help 
it.  If  the  creatures  breed,  they  must  come  to 
the  birth.  There  is  something  in  the  thing,  I 
know  ;  for  I  cut  a  hole  in  my  heart,  and  wrote 
with  the  blood.  I  wouldn't  write  such  another 
at  the  cost  of  the  same  pain  for  anything  short 
of  direct  promotion  into  heaven." 

Of  Kingsley  himself  Froude  wrote1  to  another 
clerical  friend,  friend  of  a  lifetime,  Cowley 
Powles :  "  Kingsley  is  such  a  fine  fellow — I 
almost  wish,  though,  he  wouldn't  write  and  talk 
Chartism,  and  be  always  in  such  a  stringent  ex- 
citement about  it  all.  He  dreams  of  nothing  but 
barricades  and  provisional  Governments  and  grand 
Smithfield  bonfires,  where  the  landlords  are  all 
roasting  in  the  fat  of  their  own  prize  oxen.  He 
is  so  musical  and  beautiful  in  poetry,  and  so 
rough  and  harsh  in  prose,  and  he  doesn't  know 
the  least  that  it  is  because  in  the  first  the  art 
is  carrying  him  out  of  himself,  and  making  him 
forget  just  for  a  little  that  the  age  is  so  entirely 
out  of  joint."  A  very  fine  and  discriminating 
piece  of  criticism. 

The  immediate  effect  of  The  Nemesis,  the  only 
effect  it  ever  had,  was  disastrous.  Whatever  else 
it  might  be,  it  was  undoubtedly  heretical,  and 
in  the  Oxford  of  1849  heresy  was  the  unpardonable 
sin.  The  Senior  Tutor  of  Exeter,  the  Reverend 
William  Sewell,  burnt  the  book  during  a  lecture 

1  April  loth,   1849. 


48  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

in  the  College  Hall.  Sewell,  afterwards  founder 
and  first  Warden  of  Radley,  was  a  didactic  Church- 
man, always  talking  or  writing,  seldom  thinking, 
who  contributed  popular  articles  to  The  Quarterly 
Review.  The  editor,  Lockhart,  knew  their  value 
well  enough.  They  tell  one  nothing,  he  said, 
they  mean  nothing,  they  are  nothing,  but  they 
go  down  like  bottled  velvet.  Se well's  eccen- 
tricities could  not  hurt  Froude.  But  more  serious 
consequences  followed.  The  Governing  Body  of 
Exeter,  the  Rector1  and  Fellows,  called  upon 
him  to  resign  his  Fellowship.  This  they  had 
no  moral  right  to  do,  and  Froude  should  have 
rejected  the  demand.  For  though  his  name 
and  college  were  on  the  title-page  of  the  book, 
the  book  itself  was  a  work  of  fiction,  and  he 
could  not  justly  be  held  responsible  for  the 
opinions  of  the  characters.  Expulsion  was, 
however,  held  out  to  him  as  the  alternative  of 
resignation. 

"  If  the  Rector  will  permit  me,"  he  wrote 
from  Oxford  to  Clough,  "  to-morrow  I  cease  to 
be  a  Fellow  of  the  College.  But  there  is  a 
doubt  if  he  will  permit  it,  and  will  not  rather  try 
to  send  me  out  in  true  heretic  style.  My  book 
is  therefore,  as  you  may  suppose,  out.  I  know 
little  of  what  is  said,  but  it  sells  fast,  and  is  being 
read,  and  is  producing  sorrow  this  time,  I  under- 
stand, as  much  as  anger,  but  the  two  feelings 
will  speedily  unite." 

1  Dr.  Richards. 


OXFORD  49 

If  he  could  have  appealed  to  a  court  of  law, 
the  authorities  would  probably  have  failed  for 
want  of  evidence,  and  Froude  would  have  re- 
tained his  Fellowship.  But  he  was  sensitive, 
and  yielded  to  pressure.  He  signed  the  paper 
presented  to  him  as  if  he  had  been  a  criminal, 
and  shook  the  dust  of  the  University  from  his  feet. 
Within  ten  years  a  new  Rector,  quite  as  orthodox 
as  the  old,  had  invited  him  to  replace  his  name  on 
the  books  of  the  college.  It  was  long,  however, 
before  he  returned  to  an  Oxford  where  only  the 
buildings  were  the  same.  Twenty  years  from 
this  date  an  atheistic  treatise  might  have  been 
written  with  perfect  impunity  by  any  Fellow  of 
any  college.  Nobody  would  even  have  read  it  if 
atheism  had  been  its  only  recommendation.  The 
wise  indifference  of  the  wise  had  relieved  true 
religion  from  the  paralysis  of  official  patronage. 
But  in  1849  the  action  of  the  Rector  and  Fellows 
was  heartily  applauded  by  the  Visitor,  Bishop 
Phillpotts,  the  famous  Henry  of  Exeter.  Their 
behaviour  was  conscientious,  and  Dr.  Richards, 
the  Rector,  was  a  model  of  dignified  urbanity.  It 
is  unreasonable  to  blame  men  for  not  being  in 
advance  of  their  age. 


(a3io) 


CHAPTER    III 

LIBERTY 

FROUDE'S  position  was  now,  from  a  worldly 
point  of  view,  deplorable.  For  the  antagon- 
ism of  High  Churchmen  he  was  of  course  prepared. 
"  Never  mind,"  he  wrote  to  Clough  of  The  Nemesis, 
"  if  the  Puseyites  hate  it ;  they  must  fear  it,  and 
it  will  work  in  the  mind  they  have  made  sick." 
But  he  was  also  assailed  in  the  Protestant  press 
as  an  awful  example  of  what  the  Oxford  Move- 
ment might  engender.  His  book  was  denounced 
on  all  sides,  even  by  freethinkers,  who  regarded  it 
as  a  reproach  to  their  cause.  The  professors  of 
University  College,  London,  had  appointed  him  to 
a  mastership  at  Hobart  Town  in  Australia,  for 
which  he  applied  the  year  before  in  the  hope 
that  change  of  scene  might  help  to  re-settle  his 
mind.  On  reading  the  attacks  in  the  newspapers 
they  pusillanimously  asked  him  to  withdraw,  and 
he  withdrew.  A  letter  to  Clough,  dated  the  6th  of 
March,  1849,  explains  his  intellectual  and  material 
position  at  this  time  in  a  vivid  and  striking  manner. 
"  I  admire  Matt,  to  a  very  great  extent,  only  I 
don't  see  what  business  he  has  to  parade  his  calm- 
ness, and  lecture  us  on  resignation,  when  he  has 

5° 


LIBERTY  51 

never  known  what  a  storm  is,  and  doesn't  know 
what  to  resign  himself  to.  I  think  he  only  knows 
the  shady  side  of  nature  out  of  books.  Still  I  think 
his  versifying,  and  generally  his  aesthetic  power 
is  quite  wonderful.  .  .  .  On  the  whole  he  shapes 
better  than  you,  I  think,  but  you  have  marble 
to  cut  out,  and  he  has  only  clay.  ...  Do  you 
think  that  if  the  Council  do  ask  me  to  give  up  I 
might  fairly  ask  Lord  Brougham  as  their  President 
to  get  me  helped  instead  to  ever  so  poor  an  honest 
living  in  the  Colonies  ?  I  can't  turn  hack  writer, 
and  I  must  have  something  fixed  to  do.  Congreve 
is  down-hearted  about  Oxford  :  not  so  I.  I  quite 
look  to  coming  back  in  a  very  few  years." 

The  Archdeacon,  conceiving  that  the  best  remedy 
for  free  thought  was  short  commons,  stopped  his 
son's  allowance.  Froude  would  have  been  alone  in 
the  world,  if  the  brave  and  generous  Kings! ey  had 
not  come  to  his  assistance.  Like  a  true  Christian, 
he  invited  Froude  to  his  house,  and  made  him  at 
home  there.  To  appreciate  the  magnanimity  of  this 
offer  we  must  consider  that  Kinglsey  was  himself 
suspected  of  being  a  heretic,  and  that  his  prominent 
association  with  Froude  brought  him  letters  of 
remonstrance  by  every  post.  He  said  nothing 
about  them,  and  Froude,  in  perfect  ignorance  of 
what  he  was  inflicting  upon  his  host,  stayed  two 
months  with  him  at  Ilfracombe  and  Lynmouth. 
Yet  Kingsley  did  not,  and  could  not,  agree  with 
Froude.  He  was  a  resolved,  serious  Christian, 
and  never  dreamt  of  giving  up  his  ministry.  He 


52  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

did  not  in  the  least  agree  with  Froude,  who 
made  no  impression  upon  him  in  argument.  He 
acted  from  kindness,  and  respect  for  integrity. 

Froude,  however,  could  not  stay  permanently 
with  the  Kingsleys.  His  father  would  have 
nothing  to  do  with  him,  and  in  his  son's  opinion 
was  right  to  leave  him  with  the  consequences 
of  his  own  errors.  But  the  outcry  against  him 
had  been  so  violent  and  excessive  as  to  provoke 
a  reaction.  Froude  might  be  an  "  infidel,"  he 
was  not  a  criminal,  and  in  resigning  his  Fellow- 
ship he  had  shown  more  honesty  than  prudence. 
His  position  excited  the  sympathy  of  influential 
persons.  Crabb  Robinson,  though  an  entire 
stranger  to  him,  wrote  a  public  protest  against 
Froude's  treatment.  Other  men,  not  less  distin- 
guished, went  farther.  Chevalier  Bunsen,  the 
Prussian  Minister,  Monckton  Milnes,  afterwards 
Lord  Houghton,  and  others  whose  names  he 
never  knew,  subscribed  a  considerable  sum  of 
money  for  maintaining  the  unpopular  writer  at 
a  German  university  while  he  made  a  serious 
study  of  theological  science.  But  he  had  had 
enough  of  theology,  and  the  munificent  offer  was 
declined,  though  Bunsen  harangued  him  enthusi- 
astically for  five  hours  in  Carlton  Gardens  on 
the  exquisite  adaptation  of  Evangelical  doctrines 
to  the  human  soul,  until  Froude  began  to  sus- 
pect that  they  must  have  originated  in  the 
soul  itself. 

At  this  time  a  greater  change  than  the  loss  of 


LIBERTY  53 

his  Fellowship  came  upon  Froude.  While  stay- 
ing with  the  Kingsleys  at  Ilfracombe,  he  met 
Mrs.  Kingsley 's  sister,  Charlotte  Grenfell,  the 
Argemone  of  Yeast,  a  lady  of  somewhat  wilful, 
yet  most  brilliant  spirit,  with  a  small  fortune  of 
her  own.  Miss  Grenfell  had  joined  the  Church 
of  Rome  two  years  before,  and  at  that  time 
thought  of  entering  a  convent.  This  idea  was 
extremely  distasteful  to  her  sister  and  her  sister's 
husband.  Their  favourite  remedy  for  feminine 
caprice  was  marriage,  and  they  soon  had  the  satis- 
faction of  seeing  Miss  Grenfell  become  Mrs.  Froude. 
There  were  some  difficulties  in  the  way,  for 
Froude' s  prospects  were  by  no  means  assured, 
and  Mrs.  Kingsley  felt  occasional  scruples.  But 
Froude  had  confidence  in  himself,  and  when  his 
mind  was  made  up  he  would  not  look  back. 

'  You  remember,"  he  wrote  to  Mrs.  Kingsley, 
in  1849,  "  I  warned  you  that  I  intended  to  take 
my  own  way  in  life,  doing  (as  I  always  have  done) 
in  all  important  matters  just  what  I  should  think 
good,  at  whatever  risk  of  consequences,  and  taking 
no  other  person's  opinion  when  it  crossed  with 
my  own.  Now  in  this  matter  I  feel  certain  that 
the  way  to  save  Charlotte  most  pain  is  to  shorten 
the  struggle,  and  that  will  be  best  done  by  being 
short,  peremptory,  and  decided  in  allowing  no 
dictation  and  no  interference.  .  .  .  Charlotte  her- 
self is  really  magnificent.  Every  letter  shows 
me  larger  nobleness  of  heart.  You  cannot  go 
back  now,  Mrs.  Kingsley." 


54 

Mrs.  Kingsley  did  not  go  back,  and  Froude 
had  his  way.  Before  the  wedding,  however, 
another  and  a  novel  experience  awaited  him. 
His  misfortunes  aroused  the  interest  of  a  rich 
manufacturer  at  Manchester,  Mr.  Darbishire,  who 
offered  him  a  resident  tutorship,  and  would 
have  taken  him  into  his  own  firm,  even,  as  it 
would  seem,  into  his  own  family,  if  he  had 
desired  to  become  a  man  of  business,  and  to 
live  in  a  smoky  town.  But  Froude  was  en- 
gaged to  be  married,  and  had  a  passionate  love 
of  the  country.  His  keen,  clear,  rapid  intelli- 
gence would  probably  have  served  him  well 
in  commercial  affairs  when  once  he  had  learnt 
to  understand  them.  He  was  reserved  for  a 
very  different  destiny,  and  he  gratefully  declined 
Mr.  Darbishire's  offer.  Nevertheless,  his  stay 
at  Manchester  as  private  tutor  had  some  share 
in  his  mental  development.  He  made  acquaint- 
ance with  interesting  persons,  such  as  Harriet 
Martineau,  Geraldine  Jewsbury,  Mrs.  Gaskell, 
and  William  Edward  Forster,  then  known  as  a 
young  Quaker  who  had  devoted  himself,  in  the 
true  Quaker  spirit  of  self-sacrifice,  to  relieving 
the  sufferers  from  the  Irish  famine.  Besides 
Manchester  friends,  Froude  imbibed  Manchester 
principles.  He  had  been  half  inclined  to  sym- 
pathise with  the  socialism  of  Louis  Blanc  and 
other  French  revolutionists.  Manchester  cured 
him.  He  adopted  the  creed  of  individualism, 
private  enterprise,  no  interference  by  Government, 


LIBERTY  55 

and  free  trade.  In  these  matters  he  did  not,  at  that 
time,  go  with  Carlyle,  as  in  ecclesiastical  matters 
he  had  not  gone  with  Newman.  His  mind  was 
intensely  practical,  though  in  personal  questions 
of  self-interest  he  was  careless,  and  even  indifferent. 
Henceforth  he  abandoned  speculation,  as  well 
philosophical  as  theological,  and  reverted  to  the 
historical  studies  of  his  youth.  Philosophy  at 
Oxford  in  those  days  meant  Plato,  Aristotle,  and 
Bishop  Butler.  Froude  was  a  good  Greek  scholar, 
and  he  had  the  true  Oxford  reverence  for  Butler. 
But  he  had  not  gone  deeper  into  philosophy  than 
his  examinations  and  his  pupils  required.  He 
liked  positive  results,  and  metaphysicians  always 
suggested  to  him  the  movements  of  a  squirrel 
in  a  cage. 

The  alternative  to  business  was  literature. 
Biographies  of  literary  men,  said  Carlyle,  are  the 
most  wretched  documents  in  human  history, 
except  the  Newgate  Calendar.  But  Carlyle  said 
many  things  he  did  not  believe,  and  this  was 
probably  one  of  them.  The  truth  is,  that  the 
literary  profession,  like  the  commercial,  requires 
some  little  capital  with  which  to  set  out,  and 
Froude  received  this  with  his  wife.  Besides  it 
he  had  brilliant  talents,  unflagging  industry,  and 
powers  of  writing  such  as  have  seldom  been  given 
to  any  of  the  sons  of  men.  While  at  Manchester 
he  composed  The  Cat's  Pilgrimage,  the  earliest 
of  his  Short  Studies  in  date.  The  moral  of  this 
fanciful  fable  is  very  like  the  moral  of  Candide. 


56  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

The  discontented  cat,  tired  of  her  monotonously 
comfortable  place  on  the  hearthrug,  goes  out  into 
the  world,  and  gets  nothing  more  than  experience 
for  her  pains.  She  finds  the  other  animals  occupied 
with  their  own  concerns,  and  enjoying  life  because 
they  do  not  go  beyond  them.  Not  a  very  elevating 
paper,  perhaps,  but  better  than  The  Nemesis  of 
Faith,  and  Froude's  last  word  on  the  subjects 
that  had  tormented  his  youth. 

He  recoiled  from  materialism,  finding  that  it 
offered  no  explanation  of  the  universe.  Faith 
in  God  he  had  never  entirely  lost,  and  on  that  he 
founded  his  henceforth  unshaken  belief  in  the 
providential  government  of  the  world.  What- 
ever might  be  the  origin  of  the  Christian  religion, 
it  furnished  the  best  guide  of  life ;  and  spiritual 
truth,  as  Bunsen  said,  was  independent  of  history. 
He  had  no  sort  of  sympathy  with  those  who 
rejected  belief  in  Christianity  altogether,  still 
less  with  those  who  abandoned  Theism.  Although 
he  could  not  be  a  minister  of  the  Church,  he  was 
content  to  be  a  member,  understanding  the  Church 
to  be  what  he  was  brought  up  to  think  it,  the 
national  organ  of  religion,  a  Protestant,  evan- 
gelical establishment  under  the  authority  of  the 
law  and  the  supremacy  of  the  Crown. 

Froude  returned  to  Manchester  immediately 
after  his  marriage,  but  his  wife  did  not  like 
the  place  nor  the  people.  They  looked  about 
for  a  country  home,  and  were  fortunate  enough 
to  find  the  most  enchanting  spot  in  North  Wales. 


LIBERTY  57 

Plas  Gwynant,  the  shining  place,  stands  on  a 
rising  ground  surrounded  by  woods,  at  the  foot 
of  Snowdon,  between  Capel  Curig  and  Beddgelert. 
Beyond  the  lawn  and  meadow  is  Dinas  Lake.  A 
cherry  orchard  stood  close  to  the  house  door,  and 
a  torrent  poured  through  a  rocky  ravine  in  the 
grounds,  falling  into  a  pool  below.  A  mile  up  the 
valley  was  the  glittering  lake,  Lyn  Gwynant,  with 
a  boat  and  plenty  of  fishing.  Good  shooting 
was  also  within  reach. 

To  this  ideal  home  Froude  came  with  his  wife 
in  the  summer  of  1850.  Here  began  a  new  life 
of  cloudless  happiness  and  perfect  peace.  His 
spiritual  difficulties  fell  away  from  him,  and  he 
found  that  the  Church  in  which  he  had  been  born 
was  comprehensive  enough  for  him,  as  for  others. 
He  was  not  called  upon  to  solve  problems  which 
had  baffled  the  subtlest  intellects,  and  would  baffle 
them  till  the  end  of  time.  Religion  could  be  made 
practical,  and  not  until  its  practical  lessons  had 
been  exhausted  was  it  necessary  to  go  farther 
afield.  "  Do  the  duty  that  lies  nearest  you," 
said  Goethe,  who  knew  art  and  science,  literature 
and  life,  as  few  men  have  known  them.  Froude 
was  never  idle,  and  never  at  a  loss  for  amusement. 
Although  he  wrote  regularly,  and  his  love  of 
reading  was  a  passion,  he  had  the  keenest  enjoy- 
ment of  sport  and  expeditions,  of  country  air  and 
sights  and  sounds,  of  natural  beauty  and  physical 
exercise.  It  was  impossible  to  be  dull  in  his 
company,  for  he  was  the  prince  of  conversers, 


58  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

drawing  out  as  much  as  he  gave.  No  wonder  that 
there  were  numerous  visitors  at  Plas  Gwynant. 
He  was  the  best  and  warmest  of  friends.  In 
London  he  would  always  lay  aside  his  work 
for  the  day  to  entertain  one  of  his  contemporaries 
at  Oxford,  and  at  Plas  Gwynant  they  found 
a  hospitable  welcome.  He  would  fish  with 
them,  or  shoot  with  them,  or  boat  with  them,  or 
walk  with  them,  discussing  every  subject  under 
heaven.  Perhaps  the  most  valued  of  his  guests 
was  Clough,  who  had  then  written  most  of  his 
poetry,  and  projected  new  enterprises,  not  knowing 
how  short  his  life  would  be. 

Besides  Clough,  Matthew  Arnold  came  to 
Plas  Gwynant,  and  Charles  Kingsley,  and  John 
Conington,  the  Oxford  Professor  of  Latin,  and 
Max  Miiller,  the  great  philologist.  A  letter  to 
Max  Miiller,  dated  the  25th  of  June,  1851,  gives  a 
pleasant  picture  of  existence  there. 

"  I  shall  be  so  glad  to  see  you  in  July.  Come 
and  stay  as  long  as  work  will  let  you,  and  you  can 
endure  our  hospitality.  We  are  poor,  and  so 
are  not  living  at  a  high  rate.  I  can't  give  you 
any  wine,  because  I  haven't  a  drop  in  the  house, 
and  you  must  bring  your  own  cigars,  as  I  am  come 
down  to  pipes.  But  to  set  against  that,  you  shall 
have  the  best  dinner  in  Wales  every  day — fresh 
trout,  Welsh  mutton,  as  much  bitter  ale  as  you 
can  drink  ;  a  bedroom  and  a  little  sitting-room 
joining  it  all  for  your  own  self,  and  the  most 
beautiful  look-out  from  the  window  that  I  have 


LIBERTY  59 

ever  seen.  You  may  vary  your  retirement.  You 
may  change  your  rooms  for  the  flower-garden, 
which  is  an  island  in  the  river,  or  for  the  edge  of 
the  waterfall,  the  music  of  which  will  every  night 
lull  you  to  sleep.  Last  of  all,  you  will  have  the 
society  of  myself,  and  of  my  wife,  and,  what  ought 
to  weigh  with  you  too,  you  will  give  us  the  great 
pleasure  of  yours." 

Clough  neither  fished,  nor  shot,  nor  boated, 
but  as  a  walking  companion  there  was  no  one, 
in  Froude's  opinion,  to  be  put  above  him.  For 
fishing  he  gave  pre-eminence  to  Kingsley,  and 
together  they  carried  up  their  coracles  to  waters 
higher  than  ordinary  boats  could  reach.  Kingsley 
was  ardent  in  all  forms  of  sport,  and  an  enthusiast 
for  Maurician  theology,  holding,  as  he  said,  that 
it  had  pleased  God  to  show  him  and  Maurice 
things  which  He  had  concealed  from  Carlyle. 
He  had  concealed  them  also  from  Froude,  who 
regarded  Carlyle  as  his  teacher,  feeling  that  he 
owed  him  his  emancipation  from  clerical  bonds. 

Froude  and  Kingsley  did  not  agree  either  in 
theology  or  in  politics.  "  I  meant  to  say,"  Froude 
wrote  to  his  wife's  brother-in-law  in  1851,  "  that 
the  philosophical  necessity  of  the  Incarnation 
as  a  fact  must  have  been  as  cogent  to  the  earliest 
thinkers  as  to  ourselves.  If  we  may  say  it  must 
have  been,  they  might  say  so.  And  they  might, 
and  indeed  must,  have  concluded,  each  at  their 
several  date,  that  the  highest  historical  person 
known  to  them  must  have  been  the  Incarnate 


60  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

God  ;  so  that  unless  the  Incarnation  was  the  first 
fact  in  human  history,  there  must  have  been  a 
time  when  they  would  have  used  the  argument 
and  it  would  have  led  them  wrong." 

Concerning  Kingsley's  Socialism,  especially  as 
shown  in  Hypatia,  Froude  was  cold  and  critical. 
"  It  is  by  no  means  as  yet  clear  to  me,"  he  wrote 
about  this  time,  "  that  all  good  people  are  Social- 
ists, and  that  therefore  whoever  sticks  to  the  old 
thing  is  a  bad  fellow.  Whatever  is  has  no  end 
of  claims  on  us.  I  have  no  doubt  that  we  could 
not  get  on  without  the  devil.  If  it  had  not  been 
so,  he  would  not  have  been.  The  ideas  must  be 
content  to  fight  a  long  time  before  they  assimilate 
all  the  wholesome  flesh  in  the  universe,  and  we 
cannot  leave  what  works  somehow  for  what  only 
promises  to  work,  and  has  yet  by  no  means  largely 
realised  that  promise.  I  consider  it  a  bad  sign 
in  the  thinkers  among  the  Christian  Socialists  if 
they  set  to  cursing  those  who  don't  agree  with 
them.  The  multitudes  must,  but  the  thinkers 
should  not.  I  cannot  believe  that  if  Clement  of 
Alexandria  had  been  asked  whether  he  candidly 
believed  Tacitus  was  damned  because  he  was  a 
heathen  he  would  have  said  '  Yes.'  Indeed,  on 
indifferent  matters  (supposing  he  had  been  alive 
in  Tacitus' s  time),  I  don't  think  he  would  have 
minded  writing  a  leader  in  the  Ada  Diurna, 
even  though  Tacitus  followed  on  the  other 
side  I  " 

Oxford,  and   its   old  clothes,  Froude  had  cast 


LIBERTY  61 

behind  him.  He  had  never  taken  priest's  orders, 
and  the  clerical  disabilities  imposed  upon  him 
were  not  only  cruel,  but  ridiculous.  Shut  out  from 
the  law,  he  turned  to  literature,  and  became  a 
regular  reviewer.  There  was  not  so  much  re- 
viewing then  as  there  is  now,  but  it  was  better 
paid.  His  services  were  soon  in  great  request, 
for  he  wrote  an  incomparable  style. 

The  origin  of  Froude's  style  is  not  obscure. 
Too  original  to  be   an  imitator,  he  was  in  his 
handling  of  English  an  apt  pupil  of  Newman. 
There  is  the  same  ease,  the  same  grace,  the  same 
lightness  of  elastic  strength.     Froude,  like  New- 
man, can  pass  from  racy,  colloquial  vernacular, 
the  talk  of  educated  men  who  understand  each 
other,  to  heights  of  genuine  eloquence,  where  the 
resources  of  our  grand  old  English  tongue  are 
drawn  out  to  the  full.     His  vocabulary  was  large 
and  various.     He  was  familiar  with  every  device 
of  rhetoric.     He  could  play  with  every  pipe  in 
the  language,  and  sound  what  stop  he  pleased. 
Oxford  men  used  to  talk  very  much  in  those  days, 
and  have  talked  more  or  less  ever  since,  about  the 
Oriel  style.     Perhaps  the  best  example  of  it  is 
Church,   the   accomplished   Dean   01   St.    Paul's. 
Church  does  not  rival  Newman  and  Froude  at  their 
best.     But  he  never,  as  they  sometimes  do,  falls 
into  loose  and  slipshod  writing.      He  was  the  fine 
flower  of  the  old  Oxford  education,  growing  in 
hedged    gardens,    sheltered    from    the    winds    of 
heaven,^such  as  Catullus  painted  in  everlasting 


62  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

colours  long  centuries  ago.  Froude  was  a  man 
of  the  world,  who  knew  the  classics,  and  the  minds 
of  men,  and  cities,  and  governments,  and  the 
various  races  which  make  up  the  medley  of  the 
universe.  He  wrote  for  the  multitude  who  read 
books  for  relaxation,  who  want  to  have  their  facts 
clearly  stated,  and  their  thinking  done  for  them. 
He  satisfied  all  their  requirements,  and  yet  he 
expressed  himself  with  the  natural  eloquence  of 
a  fastidious  scholar.  Lucky  indeed  were  the 
editors  who  could  obtain  the  services  of  such  a 
reviewer,  and  he  was  fortunate  in  being  able  to 
recommend  with  power  the  poetry  of  his  friend, 
Matthew  Arnold.1 

Although  Froude  enjoyed  with  avidity  the 
conversation  of  his  chosen  friends,  he  was  not 
satisfied  with  intellectual  epicureanism.  He  was 
resolved  to  make  for  himself  a  name,  to  leave 
behind  him  some  not  unworthy  memorial.  The 
history  of  the  Reformation  attracted  him  strongly. 
If  an  historian  is  a  man  of  science,  or  a  mere 
chronicler,  then  certainly  Froude  was  not  an  his- 
torian. He  made  no  claim  to  be  impartial.  He 
held  that  the  Oxford  Movement  was  not  only 
endangering  the  National  Church,  but  injuring 
the  national  character  and  corrupting  men's 
knowledge  of  the  past.  He  believed  in  the  Re- 
formation first  as  an  historic  fact,  and  secondly 

1  His  recommendation  was  entirely  sincere.  "Matt.  A.'s  Sohrab 
and  Rustum,"  he  wrote  to  Clough,  "is  to  my  taste  all  but 
perfect." 


LIBERTY  63 

as  a  beneficent  revolt  of  the  laity  against  clerical 
dominion.  He  denied  that  since  the  Reformation 
there  had  been  one  Catholic  Church,  and  as  an 
Englishman  he  asserted  in  the  language  of  the 
Articles  that  the  Bishop  of  Rome  had  no  juris- 
diction within  this  realm  of  England.  He  wanted 
to  vindicate  the  reformers,  and  to  prove  that  in 
the  struggle  against  Papal  Supremacy  English 
patriots  took  the  side  of  the  king.  He  was  roused 
to  indignation  by  slanders  against  the  character 
of  Elizabeth  ;  and  he  held,  as  almost  every  one 
now  holds,  that  the  attempt  to  make  an  innocent 
saint  of  Mary  Stuart  was  futile.  Even  More  and 
Fisher  he  refused  to  accept  as  candidates  for  the 
crown  of  martyrdom.  They  were  both  excellent 
men.  More  was,  in  some  respects,  a  great  man. 
They  were  certainly  far  more  virtuous  than  the  king 
who  put  them  to  death.  But  they  were  executed 
for  treason,  not  for  heresy,  and  to  clear  their 
memory  it  is  necessary  to  show  that  they  had  no 
part  in  conspiring  with  a  foreign  Power  against 
their  lawful  sovereign.  That  Power,  the  Church 
of  Rome,  a  Power  till  1870,  Froude  cordially 
hated.  He  regarded  it  as  an  obstacle  to  progress, 
an  enemy  of  freedom,  an  enslaver  of  the  intellect 
and  the  soul.  The  English  Catholics  of  his  own 
time  were  mild,  honourable,  and  loyal.  Although 
they  had  been  relieved  of  their  disabilities,  they 
had  no  power.  Froude's  reading  and  reflection  led 
him  to  infer  that  when  the  Church  was  powerful 
it  aimed  a  deadly  blow  at  English  independence, 


64  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

and  that  Henry  VIII.,  with  all  his  moral  failings, 
was  entitled  to  the  credit  of  averting  it.  These 
opinions  were  not  new.  They  were  held  by  most 
people  when  Froude  was  a  boy.  It  was  from 
Oxford  that  an  attack  upon  them  came,  and 
from  Oxford  came  also,  in  the  person  of  Froude, 
their  champion. 

Froude' s  historical  work  took  at  first  the  form 
of  essays,  chiefly  in  The  Westminster  Review  and 
Fraser's  Magazine.  The  Rolls  Series  of  State 
Papers  had  not  then  begun,  and  the  reign  of  Henry 
was  imperfectly  understood.  Froude  was  espe- 
cially attracted  by  the  age  of  Elizabeth,  who 
admired  her  father  as  a  monarch,  whatever  she 
may  have  thought  of  him  as  a  man.  It  was 
an  age  of  mighty  dramatists,  of  divine  poets,  of 
statesmen  wise  and  magnanimous,  if  not  great, 
of  seamen  who  made  England,  not  Spain,  the 
ruler  of  the  seas.  It  was  with  the  seamen  that 
Froude  began.  His  essay  on  England's  Forgotten 
Worthies,  which  appeared  in  The  Westminster 
Review  for  1852,  was  suggested  by  a  new,  and 
very  bad,  edition  of  Hakluyt.  It  inspired  Kings- 
ley  with  the  idea  of  his  historical  novel,  Westward 
Ho !  and  Tennyson  drew  from  it,  many  years 
later,  the  story  of  his  noble  poem,  The  Revenge. 
The  eloquence  is  splendid,  and  the  patriotic  fervour 
stirs  the  blood  like  the  sound  of  a  trumpet.  The 
cruelties  of  the  Spaniards  in  South  America, 
perpetrated  in  the  name  of  Holy  Church,  are 
described  with  unflinching  fidelity  and  unsparing 


LIBERTY  65 

truth.  For  instance,  four  hundred  French  Hugue- 
nots were  massacred  in  cold  blood  by  Spaniards, 
who  invaded  their  settlement  in  Florida  at  a  time 
when  France  was  at  peace  with  Spain.  These 
Protestants  were  flayed  alive,  and,  to  show  that 
it  was  done  in  the  cause  of  religion,  an  inscription 
was  suspended  over  their  bodies,  "  Not  as  French- 
men, but  as  heretics."  Even  at  this  distance  of 
time  it  is  satisfactory  to  reflect  that  these  defenders 
of  the  faith  were  not  left  to  the  slow  judgment  of 
God.  A  French  privateer,  Dominique  de  Gourges, 
whose  name  deserves  to  be  held  in  honour  and 
remembrance,  sailed  from  Rochelle,  collected  a 
body  of  American  Indians,  swooped  down  upon 
the  Spanish  forts,  and  hanged  their  pious  inmates, 
wretches  not  less  guilty  than  the  authors  of  St. 
Bartholomew,  with  the  appropriate  legend,  "  Not 
as  Spaniards,  but  as  murderers."  "  It  was  at 
such  a  time,"  says  Froude,  "  and  to  take  their 
part  amidst  such  scenes  as  these,  that  the  English 
navigators  appeared  along  the  shores  of  South 
America  as  the  armed  soldiers  of  the  Reformation, 
and  as  the  avengers  of  humanity."  Hawkins, 
Drake,  Raleigh,  Davis,  Grenville,  are  bright  names 
in  the  annals  of  British  seamanship.  But  they 
were  not  merely  staunch  patriots,  and  loyal 
subjects  of  the  great  Queen ;  they  were  pioneers 
of  civil  and  religious  freedom  from  the  most 
grievous  yoke  and  most  intolerable  bondage 
that  had  ever  oppressed  mankind. 

In  The  Westminster  for  1853  appeared  Froude's 

3 


66  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

essay  on  the  Book  of  Job,  which  may  be  taken 
as  his  final  expression  of  theological  belief.  Hence- 
forward he  turned  from  theology  to  history,  from 
speculation  to  fact.  Even  his  friendship  for 
Frederic  Maurice  could  not  rouse  him  to  any 
great  interest  in  the  latter' s  expulsion  from  King's 
College.  "As  thinkers,"  he  wrote  to  Clough  on 
the  22nd  of  November,  1853,  "  Maurice,  and  still 
more  the  Mauricians,  appear  to  me  the  most 
hopelessly  imbecile  that  any  section  of  the  world 
have  been  driven  to  believe  in.  I  am  glad  you 
liked  Job,  though  my  writing  it  was  a  mere 
accident,  and  I  am  not  likely  to  do  more  of  the 
kind.  I  am  going  to  stick  to  the  History  in  spite 
of  your  discouragement,  and  I  believe  I  shall 
make  something  of  it.  At  any  rate  one  has  sub- 
stantial stuff  between  one's  fingers  to  be  moulding 
at,  and  not  those  slime  and  sea  sand  ladders  to 
the  moon  '  opinion.' ' 

Froude  pursued  his  studies,  reading  all  the 
collections  of  original  documents  in  Strype  and 
other  chroniclers.  Why,  he  asked  himself 
should  Henry,  this  bloody  and  ferocious  tyrant, 
have  been  so  popular  in  his  own  lifetime  ? 
Parliament,  judges,  juries,  all  the  articulate 
classes  of  the  community,  why  had  they  stood 
by  him  ?  No  doubt  he  could  dissolve  Parlia- 
ment, and  dismiss  the  judges.  But  to  sub- 
mit without  a  struggle,  without  even  protest 
or  remonstrance,  was  not  like  Englishmen,  before 
or  since.  When  Erasmus  visited  England  he 


LIBERTY  67 

found  that  the  laity  were  the  best  read  and  the 
best  behaved  in  Europe,  while  the  clergy  were 
gluttonous,  profligate,  and  avaricious.  No  his- 
torian ever  prepared  himself  more  thoroughly 
for  his  task  than  Froude.  Sir  Francis  Palgrave, 
the  Deputy  Keeper  of  the  Records  under  Sir  John 
Romilly,  offered  to  let  him  see  the  unpublished 
documents  in  the  Chapter  House  at  Westminster 
which  dealt  with  the  later  years  of  Wolsey's 
Government,  and  to  the  action  of  Parliament  after 
the  Cardinal's  fall.  He  examined  them  thoroughly, 
and  accepted  Parker's  proposal  that  he  should 
write  the  history  of  the  period.  But  he  had  to 
leave  Plas  Gwynant.  The  London  Library,  which 
Carlyle  had  founded,  sufficed  for  contributions 
to  magazines.  History  was  a  more  serious  affair, 
and  it  was  necessary  for  him  to  be,  if  not  in  London, 
at  least  near  a  railway.  He  returned  to  his  native 
county,  and  took  a  house  at  Babbicombe,  from 
which,  after  three  years,  he  moved  to  Bideford. 
He  made  frequent  visits  to  London,  where  he  was 
the  guest  of  his  publisher,  John  Parker,  at  whose 
table  he  met  Arthur  Helps,  John  and  Richard 
Doyle,  Cornewall  Lewis,  Richard  Trench,  then 
Dean  of  Westminster,  and  Henry  Thomas  Buckle, 
once  famous  as  a  scientific  historian.  He  called 
on  the  Carlyles  at  their  house  in  Chelsea,  and 
began  an  intimacy  only  broken  by  death.  Carlyle 
himself  was  an  excellent  adviser  in  Froude's 
peculiar  field.  He  had  the  same  Puritan  leanings, 
the  same  sympathy  with  the  Reformation,  the 


68  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

same  hostility  to  ecclesiastical  interference  with 
secular  affairs,  unless,  as  in  the  case  of  John  Knox, 
the  interference  was  directed  against  Rome. 
Froude  considered  him  not  unlike  Knox  in  humour, 
keenness  of  intellect,  integrity,  and  daring.  His- 
tory was  the  one  form  of  literature  outside  Goethe 
and  Burns  for  which  he  really  cared.  He  had 
translated  Wilhelm  Meister  in  1824,  and  it  was 
probably  at  his  suggestion  that  Froude  translated 
Elective  Affinities  for  Bonn's  Library  in  1850. 
Scottish  history  and  Scottish  character  Carlyle 
knew  as  he  knew  his  Bible.  His  assistance  and 
encouragement,  which  were  freely  given,  proved 
invaluable  to  Froude. 

Froude  settled  steadily  down  to  work,  dividing 
his  time  between  London  and  Devonshire.  Shoot- 
ing and  fishing  had  for  the  time  to  be  dropped. 
For  recreation  he  joined  an  archery  club,  where, 
as  James  Spedding  told  him,  you  were  always  sure 
of  your  game.  In  after  life  Froude,  who  never  bore 
malice,  used  to  say  that  his  father  had  been  right  in 
leaving  him  to  his  own  resources,  and  that  the 
necessity  of  providing  for  himself  was,  in  his  in- 
stance, as  in  so  many  others,  the  foundation  of  his 
career.  He  owed  much  to  his  publisher,  John 
Parker,  who  was  liberal,  generous,  and  confiding. 
Publishers,  like  mothers-in-law,  have  got  a  bad 
name  from  bad  j  okes.  Parker,  by  trusting  Froude, 
and  relieving  him  from  anxiety  while  he  wrote, 
smoothed  the  way  for  a  memorable  contribution 
to  English  history  which  after  many  vicissitudes 


LIBERTY  69 

has  now  an  established  place  as  a  work  of  genius 
and  research. 

The  principles  on  which  he  worked  are  explained 
in  a  contribution  to  the  volume  of  Oxford  Essays 
for  the  year  1855.  The  subject  of  this  brilliant 
though  forgotten  paper  is  the  best  means  of 
teaching  English  history,  and  the  author's  judg- 
ments upon  modern  historians  are  peculiar.  Hume 
and  Hallam,  the  latter  of  whom  was  still  living, 
are  indiscriminately  condemned.  Macaulay, 
whose  first  two  volumes  were  already  famous, 
is  ignored.  The  Oxford  examiners  are  severely 
censured  for  prescribing  Campbell's  Lives  of  the 
Chancellors  as  authoritative,  and  Carlyle's  Crom- 
well, a  collection  of  materials  rather  than  a  book, 
is  pronounced  to  be  the  one  good  modern  history, 
though  Froude  denounces,  with  friendly  candour, 
Carlyle's  "  distempered  antagonism  to  the  pre- 
vailing fashions  of  the  age."  The  most  charac- 
teristic part  of  this  essay,  however,  is  that  which 
recommends  the  Statutes,  with  their  preambles, 
as  the  best  text-book,  and  the  following  passage 
would  be  confidently  assigned  by  most  critics 
to  the  History  itself  : 

'  Who  now  questions,  to  mention  an  extreme 
instance,  that  Anne  Boleyn's  death  was  the  result 
of  the  licentious  caprice  of  Henry  ?  and  yet  her 
own  father,  the  Earl  of  Wiltshire,  her  uncle,  the 
Duke  of  Norfolk,  the  hero  of  Flodden  Field,  the 
Privy  Council,  the  House  of  Lords,  the  Arch- 
bishop and  Bishops,  the  House  of  Commons,  the 


70  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

Grand  Jury  of  Middlesex,  and  three  other  juries, 
assented  without,  as  far  as  we  know,  an  opposing 
voice,  to  the  proofs  of  her  guilt,  and  approved  of 
the  execution  of  the  sentence  against  her." 

Froude  was  not,  however,  so  much  absorbed  in 
the  work  of  his  life  that  he  could  not  form  and 
express  strong  opinions  upon  the  great  events 
passing  around  him.  His  view  of  the  Russian 
war  and  of  the  French  alliance  was  set  forth  with 
much  plainness  of  speech  in  a  letter  to  Max 
Miiller1 : 

"  I  felt  in  the  autumn  (and  you  were  angry  at 
me  for  saying  so)  that  the  very  worst  thing  which 
could  happen  for  Europe  would  be  the  success 
of  the  policy  with  which  France  and  England 
were  managing  things.  Happily  the  gods  were 
against  it  too,  as  now,  after  having  between  us 
wasted  sixty  millions  of  money  and  fifty  thousand 
human  lives,  we  are  beginning  to  discover.  But 
I  have  no  hope  that  things  will  go  right,  or  that 
men  will  think  reasonably,  until  they  have  first 
exhausted  every  mode  of  human  folly.  I  still 
think  Louis  Napoleon  the  d — d'est  rascal  in 
Europe  (for  which  again  you  will  be  angry  with 
me),  and  that  his  reception  the  other  day  in 
London  will  hereafter  appear  in  history  as  simply 
the  most  shameful  episode  in  the  English  annals. 
Thinking  this,  you  will  not  consider  my  opinion 
good  for  anything,  and  therefore  I  need  not  inflict 
it  upon  you.  Humbugs,  however,  will  explode 

1  April  30th,  1855. 


LIBERTY  71 

in  the  present  state  of  the  atmosphere,  and  the 
Austrian  humbug,  for  instance,  is  at  last,  God  be 
praised  for  it,  exploding.  John  Bull,  I  suppose, 
will  work  himself  into  a  fine  fever  about  that ; 
but  he  will  think  none  the  worse  of  the  old  ladies 
in  Downing  Street  who  are  made  fools  of  :  and 
will  be  none  the  better  disposed  to  listen  to  people 
who  told  him  all  along  how  it  would  be.  How- 
ever, in  the  penal  fatuity  which  has  taken  pos- 
session of  our  big  bow-wow  people,  and  in  even 
the  general  folly,  I  see  great  ground  for  comfort 
to  quiet  people  like  myself ;  and  if  I  live  fifteen 
years,  I  still  hope  I  shall  see  a  Republic  among  us." 
Froude's  Republicanism  did  not  last.  His 
opinion  of  Louis  Napoleon  never  altered. 


CHAPTER    IV 

THE   HISTORY 

"  T  T  has  not  yet  become  superfluous  to  insist," 
J_  said  the  Regius  Professor  of  Modern 
History  in  the  University  of  Cambridge  on 
the  26th  of  January,  1903,  "  that  history  is  a 
science,  no  less  and  no  more."  If  this  view  is 
correct  and  exhaustive,  Froude  was  no  historian. 
He  must  remain  outside  the  pale  in  the  company 
of  Thucydides,  Tacitus,  Gibbon,  Macaulay, 
and  Mommsen.  Among  literary  historians,  the 
special  detestation  of  the  pseudo-scientific  school, 
Froude  was  pre-eminent.  Few  things  excite  more 
suspicion  than  a  good  style,  and  no  theory  is  more 
plausible  than  that  which  associates  clearness  of 
expression  with  shallowness  of  thought.  Froude, 
however,  was  no  fine  writer,  no  coiner  of  phrases 
for  phrases'  sake.  A  mere  chronicler  of  events 
he  would  hardly  have  cared  to  be.  He  had  a 
doctrine  to  propound,  a  gospel  to  preach.  "  The 
Reformation,"  he  said,  "  was  the  hinge  on  which 
all  modern  history  turned,"  *  and  he  regarded 
the  Reformation  as  a  revolt  of  the  laity  against 

1  Lectures  on  the  Council  of  Trent,  p.  i. 
72 


THE  HISTORY  73 

the  clergy,  rather  than  a  contest  between  two  sets 
oT  rival  dogmas  for  supremacy  over  the  human 
mind.  That  is  the  key  of  the  historical  position 
which  he  took  up  from  the  first,  and  always  de- 
fended. He  held  the  Church  of  Rome  to  have 
been  the  enemy  of  human  freedom,  and  of  British 
independence.  He  was  devoid  of  theological  pre- 
judice, and  never  reviled  Catholicism  as  Newman 
reviled  it  before  his  conversion.  But  he  held  that 
the  reformers,  alike  in  England,  in  France,  and 
in  Germany,  were  fighting  for  truth,  honesty, 
and  private  judgment  against  priestcraft  and 
ecclesiastical  tyranny.  The  scepticism  and  cyni- 
cism of  which  he  was  often  accused  were  on  the 
surface.  They  were  provoked  by  what  he  felt 
to  be  hypocrisy  and  sham.  They  were  not  his 
true  self.  He  believed  firmly,  unflinchingly,  and 
always  in  "  the  grand,  simple  landmarks  of 
morality,"  which  existed  before  all  Churches,  and 
would  exist  if  all  Churches  disappeared. 

ov  yap  TO.VVV  ye  Ka\0es,  dXX'  act  nore 
£f)  Tavra,  Kovdds  ol8tv  e'£  OTOV  (f>dvr). 


Before  Abraham  was  they  were,  and  it  is  im- 
possible to  imagine  a  time  when  they  will  have 
ceased  to  be. 

Froude  was  an  Erastian,  holding  that  the 
Church  should  be  subordinate  to  the  State. 
True  religion  is  incompatible  with  persecution. 
But  true  religion  is  rare,  and  the  best  modern 
security  against  the  persecutor  is  the  secular 


74  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

power.  Mr.  Spurgeon  once  excited  great  applause 
from  members  of  his  Church  by  declaring  that 
the  Baptists  had  never  persecuted.  When  the 
cheers  had  subsided  he  explained  that  it  was 
because  they  had  never  had  a  chance.  Froude 
was  convinced  that  ecclesiastics  could  not  be 
trusted,  and  that  they  would  oppress  the  laity 
unless  the  laity  muzzled  them.  He  held  that 
the  reformers  had  been  calumniated,  that  their 
services  were  in  danger  of  being  forgotten,  and 
that  the  modern  attempt  to  ignore  the  Reforma- 
tion was  not  only  unhistorical,  but  disingenuous. 
He  wrote  partly  to  rehabilitate  them,  and  partly 
to  prove  that  Henry  VIII.  had  conferred  great 
benefits  upon  England  by  his  repudiation  of 
Papal  authority.  He  took,  as  he  considered 
it  his  duty  to  take,  the  side  of  individual 
liberty  against  ecclesiastical  authority,  and  of 
England  against  Rome.  The  idea  that  an  his- 
torian was  to  have  no  opinions  of  his  own,  or 
that,  having  them,  he  was  to  conceal  them,  never 
entered  his  mind. 

That  Froude  had  any  prejudice  against  the 
Church  of  England  as  such  is  a  baseless  fancy. 
He  believed  in  the  Church  of  his  childhood,  and, 
unless  the  word  be  used  in  the  narrow  sense  of 
the  clerical  profession,  he  never  left  it  to  the  end 
of  his  days.  It  was  to  him,  as  it  was  to  his  father, 
a  Protestant  Church,  out  of  communion  with 
Rome,  cut  off  from  the  Pope  and  his  court  by  the 
great  upheaval  of  the  sixteenth  century.  It  is 


THE    HISTORY  75 

unreasonable,  and  indeed  foolish,  to  say  that  that 
opinion  disqualified  him  to  be  the  historian  of 
Henry  VIII.,  and  Mary  Tudor,  and  Elizabeth. 
The  Catholicism  of  Lingard  is  not  considered 
to  be  a  disqualification  by  sensible  Protestants. 
Froude's  faults  as  an  historian  were  of  a  different 
kind,  and  had  nothing  to  do  with  his  ecclesiastical 
views.  He  was  not  the  only  Erastian,  nor  was 
he  an  Erastian  pure  and  simple.  He  has  left  it 
on  record  that  Macaulay's  unfairness  to  Cranmer 
in  the  celebrated  review  of  Hallam's  Constitu- 
tional History  first  suggested  to  him  the  project 
of  his  own  book.  His  besetting  sin  was  not 
so  much  Erastianism,  or  secularism,  as  a  love 
of  paradox.  Henry  VIII.  seemed  to  him  not 
merely  a  great  statesman  and  a  true  patriot,  but 
a  victim  of  persistent  misrepresentation,  whose 
lofty  motives  had  been  concealed,  and  displaced 
by  vile,  baseless  calumnies.  More  and  Fisher, 
honoured  for  three  centuries  as  saints,  he  sus- 
pected, and,  as  he  thought,  discovered  to  have 
been  traitors  who  justly  expiated  their  offences 
on  the  block.  He  was  not  satisfied  with  proving 
that  there  was  a  case  for  Henry,  and  that  the 
triumph  of  Rome  would  have  been  the  end  of 
civil  as  well  as  spiritual  freedom :  he  must  go 
on  to  whitewash  the  tyrant  himself,  and  to  prove 
that  his  marriage  with  Anne  Boleyn,  like  his 
separation  from  Katharine  of  Aragon,  was  simply 
the  result  of  an  unselfish  desire  to  provide  the 
country  with  a  male  heir.  The  refusal  of  More 


76  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

and  Fisher  to  acknowledge  the  royal  supremacy 
may  show  that  they  were  Catholics  first  and 
Englishmen  afterwards,  without  impugning  their 
personal  integrity,  or  justifying  the  malice  of 
Thomas  Cromwell.  To  judge  Henry  as  if  he  were 
a  constitutional  king  with  a  secure  title,  in  no 
more  danger  from  Catholics  than  Louis  XIV.  was 
from  Huguenots,  is  doubtless  preposterous.  If  the 
Catholics  had  got  the  upper  hand,  they  would 
have  deposed  him,  and  put  him  to  death.  In  that 
fell  strife  of  mighty  opposites  the  voice  of  tolera- 
tion was  not  raised,  and  would  not  have  been 
heard.  Tyrant  as  he  was  himself,  Henry  in  his 
battle  against  Rome  did  represent  the  English 
people,  and  his  cause  was  theirs.  Froude  brought 
out  this  great  truth,  and  to  bring  it  out  was  a 
great  service.  Unfortunately  he  went  too  far 
the  other  way,  and  impartial  readers  who  had 
no  sympathy  with  Cardinal  Campeggio  were 
revolted  by  what  looked  like  a  defence  of  cruel 
persecution.  The  welfare  of  a  nation  is  more 
important  in  history  than  the  observance  of  any 
marriage  ;  and  if  Henry  had  been  guided  by  mere 
desire,  there  was  no  reason  why  he  should  marry 
Anne  Boleyn  at  all.  Froude's  achievement,  which, 
despite  all  criticism,  remains,  was  marred  or 
modified  by  his  too  obvious  zeal  for  upsetting 
established  conclusions  and  reversing  settled 
beliefs. 

The    moment  that    Froude  had    made  up  his 
mind,  which  was  not  till  after  long  and  careful 


THE    HISTORY  77 

research,  he  began  to  paint  a  picture.  The 
lights  were  delicately  and  adroitly  arranged. 
The  artist's  eye  set  all  accessories  in  the  most 
telling  positions.  He  was  an  advocate,  an  in- 
comparably brilliant  advocate,  in  his  mode  of 
presenting  a  case.  But  it  was  his  own  case,  the 
case  in  which  he  believed,  not  a  case  he  had  been 
retained  to  defend.  When  he  came  to  deal  with 
Elizabeth  he  was  on  firmer  ground.  By  that 
time  the  Reformation  was  an  accomplished  fact, 
and  the  fiercest  controversies  lay  behind  him. 
Disgusted  as  he  was  with  the  scandals  invented 
against  the  virgin  queen,  he  did  not  shrink  from 
exposing  the  duplicity  and  meanness  which  tarnish 
the  lustre  of  her  imperishable  renown.  Like 
Knox,  he  was  insensible  to  the  charms  of  Mary 
Stuart,  and  that  is  a  deficiency  hard  to  forgive 
in  a  man.  Yet  who  can  deny  that  Elizabeth  only 
did  to  Mary  as  Mary  would  have  done  to  her  ? 
The  morality  of  the  Guises  was  as  much  a  part 
of  Mary  as  her  scholarship,  her  grace,  her  profound 
statecraft,  the  courage  which  a  voluptuous  life 
never  impared.  Froude  was  not  thinking  of  her, 
or  of  any  woman.  He  was  thinking  of  England. 
Between  the  fall  of  Wolsey  and  the  defeat  of  the 
Armada  was  decided  the  great  question  whether 
England  should  be  Catholic  or  Protestant,  bond 
or  free.  The  dazzling  Queen  of  Scots,  like  the 
virtuous  Chancellor  and  the  holy  Bishop,  were 
on  the  wrong  side.  Henry  and  Elizabeth,  with 
all  their  faults,  were  on  the  right  one.  That  is 


78  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

the  pith  and  marrow  of  Froude's  book.  Those 
who  think  that  in  history  there  is  no  side  may 
blame  him.  He  followed  Carlyle.  "  Froude  is 
a  man  of  genius,"  said  Jowett :  "  he  has  been 
abominably  treated."  "  II  avu  juste"  said  a  young 
critic  of  our  own  day *  in  reply  to  the  usual  charges 
of  inaccuracy.  The  real  object  of  his  attack  was 
that  ecclesiastical  corruption  which  belongs  to  no 
Church  exclusively,  and  is  older  than  Christianity 
itself. 

The  main  portion  of  Froude's  life  for  nearly 
twenty  years  was  occupied  with  his  History 
of  England  from  the  fall  of  Wolsey  to  the  defeat 
of  the  Spanish  Armada.  It  is  on  a  large  scale, 
in  twelve  volumes.  Every  chapter  bears  ample 
proof  of  laborious  study.  Froude  neglected  no 
source  of  information,  and  spared  himself  no 
pains  in  pursuit  of  it.  At  the  Record  Office,  in 
the  British  Museum,  at  Hatfield,  among  the  price- 
less archives  preserved  in  the  Spanish  village  of 
Simancas,  he  toiled  with  unquenchable  ardour 
and  unrelenting  assiduity.  Nine-tenths  of  his 
authorities  were  in  manuscript.  They  were  in 
five  languages.  They  filled  nine  hundred  volumes. 
Excellent  linguist  as  he  was,  Froude  could  hardly 
avoid  falling  into  some  errors.  With  his  general 
accuracy  as  an  historian  I  shall  have  to  deal  in 
a  later  part  of  this  book.  Here  I  am  only  con- 
cerned to  prove  that  he  took  unlimited  pains. 
He  kept  no  secretary,  he  was  his  own  copyist,  and 

1  Arthur  Strong. 


THE    HISTORY  79 

he  was  not  a  good  proof-reader.  Those  natural 
blots,  quas  aut  incuria  fudit,  aut  humana  parum 
cavit  natura,  are  to  be  found,  no  doubt,  in  his  pages. 
From  a  conscientious  obedience  to  truth  as  he 
understood  it,  and  a  resolute  determination  to 
present  it  as  he  saw  it,  he  never  swerved.  He 
was  not  a  chronicler,  but  an  artist,  a  moralist, 
and  a  man  of  genius.  Unless  an  historian  can 
put  himself  into  the  place  of  the  men  about 
whom  he  is  writing,  think  their  thoughts,  share 
their  hopes,  their  aspirations,  and  their  fears, 
he  had  better  be  taking  a  healthy  walk  than 
poring  over  dusty  documents.  A  paste-pot,  a 
pair  of  scissors,  the  mechanical  precision  of  a 
copying  clerk,  are  all  useful  in  their  way ;  but 
they  no  more  make  an  historian  than  a  cowl 
makes  a  monk. 

TloXXot  ju-ei/  j/ap0yjKO(j)OpOL,  BctK^ot  Se  re  navpoi. 
There  are  many  writers  of  history,  but  very  few 
historians.  Froude  wrote  with  a  definite  purpose, 
which  he  never  concealed  from  himself,  or  from 
others.  He  believed,  and  he  thought  he  could 
prove,  that  the  Reformation  freed  England  from 
a  cruel  and  degrading  yoke,  that  the  things  which 
were  Caesar's  should  be  rendered  to  Caesar,  and 
that  the  Church  should  be  restricted  within  its 
own  proper  sphere.  Those,  if  such  there  be,  who 
think  that  an  historian  should  have  no  opinions 
are  entitled  to  condemn  him.  Those  who  simply 
disagree  with  him  are  not.  No  man  is  hindered 
by  any  other  cause  than  laziness,  incompetence, 


80  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

or  more  immediately  profitable  occupations,  from 
writing  a  history  of  the  same  period  in  exactly 
the  opposite  sense. 

Froude's  earliest  chapters  were  set  in  type,  and 
distributed  among  a  few  friends  whose  judgment 
he  trusted.  The  most  sympathetic  was  Carlyle, 
who  pronounced  the  introductory  survey  of 
England's  social  condition  at  the  opening  of  the 
sixteenth  century  to  be  just  what  it  ought  to  have 
been.  Carlyle' s  marginal  notes  upon  the  first  two 
chapters  are  extremely  interesting,  and  doubly 
characteristic,  because  they  illustrate  at  the  same 
time  his  practical  shrewdness  and  his  intense 
prejudice.  For  these  reasons,  and  also  because 
in  many  instances  his  advice  was  followed,  it 
may  be  worth  while  to  give  some  account  of 
his  pencil  jottings,  written  when  Carlyle' s  hand 
was  still  firm,  and  as  legible  as  they  were  fifty 
years  ago.  Upon  the  first  chapter  as  a  whole, 
Carlyle's  judgment,  though  critical,  was  highly 
favourable. 

"  This,"  he  wrote,  "  is  a  vigorous,  sunny,  calm, 
and  wonderfully  effective  delineation  ;  pleasant 
to  read  ;  and  bids  fair  to  give  much  elucidation 
to  what  is  coming.  Curious  too  as  got  mainly 
from  good  reading  of  the  Statutes  at  large  !  Might 
there  be  with  advantage  (or  not)  some  subdivision 
into  sections,  with  headings,  etc  ?  Also,  here  and 
there,  some  condensation  of  the  excerpts  given- 
condensation  into  narrative  where  too  long- 
winded  ?  Item,  for  symmetry's  sake  (were  there 


THE    HISTORY  81 

nothing  else)  is  not  some  outline  of  spiritual 
England  a  little  to  be  expected  ?  Or  will  that 
come  piece-meal  as  we  proceed  ?  Hint,  then,  some- 
where to  that  effect  ?  Also  remember  a  little  that 
there  was  an  Europe  as  well  as  an  England  ?  In 
sum,  Euge."  Such  praise  from  such  a  man  was 
balm  to  Froude's  wounds  and  tonic  to  his  nerves. 
Practically  expelled  from  his  college,  regarded  by 
his  own  family  as  almost  a  black  sheep,  he  found 
himself  taken  up,  and  treated  as  an  equal, 
by  a  writer  of  European  fame,  whom  of  all  his 
contemporaries  he  most  admired.  In  deference 
to  Carlyle  he  rewrote  his  opening  paragraphs, 
and  added  useful  dates.  European  history  and 
spiritual  England  do  come  into  far  greater  pro- 
minence "as  we  proceed."  The  abbreviation 
and  summary  of  extracts  might,  I  think,  have 
been  carried  farther  with  advantage.  But  it  is 
curious  that  Froude  was  attacked  for  the  precisely 
opposite  fault  of  treating  his  authorities  with  too 
much  freedom.  Carlyle,  who  knew  what  historical 
labour  was,  saw  at  once  that  Froude  dealt  with 
his  material  as  a  born  student  and  an  ardent  lover 
of  truth.  His  suggestions  were  always  excellent, 
as  sound  and  just  as  they  were  careful  and  kind. 
One  criticism,  which  Froude  disregarded,  shows 
not  only  Carlyle' s  wide  knowledge  (that  appears 
throughout),  but  also  that  his  long  residence  south 
of  the  Tweed  never  made  him  really  English.  It 
refers  to  Froude's  description  of  the  English 
volunteers  at  Calais  who  "  were  for  years  the 
(33*0)  6 


82  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

terror  of  Normandy,"  and  of  Englishmen  gen- 
erally as  "  the  finest  people  in  all  Europe," 
nurtured  in  profuse  abundance  on  "  great  shins 
of  beef." 

'  This,"  says  Carry le,  "  seems  to  me  exagger- 
ated ;  what  we  call  John-Bullish.  The  English 
are  not,  in  fact,  stronger,  braver,  truer,  or  better 
than  the  other  Teutonic  races  :  they  never  fought 
better  than  the  Dutch,  Prussians,  Swedes,  etc.,  have 
done.  For  the  rest,  modify  a  little  :  Frederick 
the  Great  was  brought  up  on  beer-sops  (bread 
boiled  in  beer),  Robert  Burns  on  oatmeal  porridge  ; 
and  Mahomet  and  the  Caliphs  conquered  the 
world  on  barley  meal." 

David  Hume  would  have  thoroughly  approved 
of  this  note.  Froude's  patriotism  was  incor- 
rigible, and  he  left  the  passage  as  it  stood.  A 
little  farther  on  Carry le's  hatred  of  political 
economy,  in  which  Froude  fully  shared,  breaks 
out  with  amusing  vigour.  "  If,"  wrote  the 
younger  historian,  "  the  tendency  of  trade  to 
assume  a  form  of  mere  self-interest  be  irresistible," 
etc.  "  And  is  it  ?  "  comments  the  elder.  '  Let 
us  all  get  prussic  acid,  then."  A  recent  speculator 
preferred  cyanide  of  potassium.  But  if  "  mere 
self-interest  "  comprises  fraudulent  balance-sheets, 
it  cannot  claim  any  support  from  political  economy. 
When  Carlyle  drew  up  a  petition  to  the  House  of 
Commons  for  amending  the  law  of  copyright,  he 
was  guided  by  self-interest,  but  it  was  not  a  counsel 
of  despair.  The  City  Companies,  says  Froude, 


THE    HISTORY  83 

"  are  all  which  now  remain  of  a  vast  organisation 
which  once  penetrated  the  entire  trading  life  of 
England — an  organisation  set  on  foot  to  realise 
that  impossible  condition  of  commercial  excel- 
lence under  which  man  should  deal  faithfully 
with  his  brother,  and  all  wares  offered  for  sale, 
of  whatever  kind,  should  honestly  be  what  they 
pretend  to  be." 

For  "  impossible  "  Carlyle  proposed  "  highly 
necessary,  if  highly  difficult, "  and  a  similar  change 
was  made.  But  why  people  who  do  not  under- 
stand political  economy  should  be  more  honest 
than  those  who  do  neither  master  nor  disciple 
condescended  to  explain.  It  is  much  easier  to 
preach  than  to  argue.  More  valuable  than  these 
gibes  is  Carlyle's  reminder  that  guilds  were  not 
peculiar  to  England. 

"  In  Liibeck,  Augsburg,  Niirnberg,  Dantzig, 
not  to  speak  of  Venice,  Genoa,  Pisa, — George 
Hudson  and  the  Gospel  of  Cheap  and  Nasty  were 
totally  unknown  entities.  The  German  Gilds  even 
made  poetry  together  ;  Herr  Sachs  of  Niirnberg 
was  one  of  the  finest  pious  genial  master  shoe- 
makers that  ever  lived  anywhere — his  shoes  and 
rhymes  alike  genuine  (I  can  speak  for  the  rhymes) 
and  worthy." 

It  is  strange  that  Carlyle  should  have  taken  the 
trouble  to  correct  a  misquotation  from  Juvenal, 
and  still  stranger  that  Froude  should  have  left  the 
words  uncorrected.  Misquotation  was  a  too  fre- 
quent habit  with  him.  In  his  second  chapter  he 


84  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

applies  to  Henry  the  famous  passage  in  Tacitus's 
character  of  Galba,  and  changes  capax  imperil  to 
dignus  imperii,  though  dignus  would  have  required 
imperio,  and  would  then  have  made  inferior  sense. 
Some  of  Carlyle's  queries  were  productive  of  really 
substantial  results  ;  for  instance,  the  simple  words 
"  such  as  "  brought  out  the  fact  that  the  spoils  of 
the  monasteries  were  in  part  devoted  to  national 
defence.  "  Inveterate  frenzy  "  is  Froude's  de- 
scription of  the  years  covered  by  the  reign  of 
Edward  IV.  "  Fine  healthy  years  in  the  main, 
for  all  their  fighting,"  notes  Carlyle.  "  See  the 
Paston  Letters,  for  one  proof."  Some  of  his 
recommendations  are  racily  colloquial.  "  Give 
us  time  of  day  "  is  his  mode  of  asking  for  more 
dates.  Henry's  instructions  to  his  Secretary  or 
Ambassador  at  Rome  he  pronounces  "  very  rough 
matter  to  set  upon  the  table  uncooked,"  and 
recommends  an  Appendix,  unluckily  without  avail. 
11  Abridge,  redact,"  he  exclaims  towards  the  end, 
but  there  was  no  abridgment  and  no  redaction. 
On  the  other  hand,  "  prestige,"  stigmatised  by 
Carlyle  as  "  a  bad  newspaper  word,"  was  rejected 
for  "  influence,"  and  his  insistence  that  English 
only  should  be  used  in  the  text,  foreign  languages 
being  confined  to  notes,  was  accepted  by  Froude. 
That  "  new  doctrines  ever  gain  readiest  hearing 
among  the  common  people "  he  left  to  stand 
as  a  general  proposition,  although,  as  Carlyle 
reminded  him,  "  in  Germany  it  was  by  no  means 
the  common  people  who  believed  Luther  first, 


THE    HISTORY  85 

but  the  Elector  of  Saxony,  Philip  of  Hesse,  etc., 
etc. — Scotland  too." 

The  conclusion  at  which  Carlyle  arrived  after 
reading  the  second  chapter  is  less  favourable 
than  his  verdict  upon  the  first.  Inasmuch, 
however,  as  some  of  the  modifications  suggested 
were  made,  though  by  no  means  all  of  them,  and 
as  Carlyle 's  notions  of  history  are  worth  know- 
ing on  their  own  account,  I  will  transcribe  his 
words,  which  are  dated  the  27th  of  September, 

1855: 

'  This  chapter  contains  a  great  deal  of  well- 
meditated  knowledge,  just  insight,  and  sound 
thinking  ;  seems  calculated  to  explain  the  Phae- 
nomenon  of  the  Reformation  to  an  unusual  degree, 
in  fact  has  great  merit  of  many  kinds,  historical 
among  the  rest.  But  it  seems  to  me  (i)  to  be 
more  of  a  Dissertation  than  a  Narrative ;  to 
want  dates,  specific  details,  outline  of  every  kind. 
(2)  The  management  might  surely  be  mended  ? 
It  does  not  "  begin  at  the  beginning "  (which 
indeed  is  the  most  difficult  of  all  things,  but  also 
the  most  indispensable)  ;  the  story  is  not  clear  ; 
or  rather,  as  hinted  above,  there  is  no  story,  but 
an  explanation  of  some  story  supposed  to  be 
already  known,  which  is  contrary  to  rule  in  writing 
'  History.'  On  the  whole,  the  Author  seems  to 
have  such  a  conception  of  the  subject  as  were 
well  worth  a  better  setting  forth  ;  and  if  this  is 
all  he  has  yet  written  of  his  Book,  I  could  almost 
advise  him  to  start  afresh,  and  remodel  all  this 


86  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

second  chapter.  This  is  a  high  demand  ;  but  the 
excellence  attainable  by  him  seems  also  high. 
The  rule  throughout  is,  that  events  should  speak. 
Commentary  ought  to  be  sparing  ;  clear  insight, 
definite  conviction,  brought  about  with  a  mini- 
mum of  Commentary  ;  that  is  always  the  Art  of 
History.  Alter  or  not,  however,  there  is  such 
a  generous  breadth  of  intelligence,  of  manly  sym- 
pathy, sound  judgment,  and  in  general  of  luminous 
solidity,  promised  in  this  Book,  that  I  will  gladly 
read  it,  however  it  be  put  together.  Would  it 
not  be  better  to  specify  a  little  what  Martin  Luther 
is  about,  and  keep  up  a  chronological  intercourse, 
more  or  less  strict,  with  the  great  Continental 
ocean  of  Reform,  the  better  to  understand  the 
tides  from  it  that  ebb  and  flow  in  these  Narrow 
Seas  ?  Some  notice  of  Wiclif  too  I  expected 
in  some  form  or  other.  Once  more,  Go  on  and 
prosper  !  " 

The  notice  of  Wycliffe  does  seem  a  rather  un- 
reasonable expectation,  and  a  history  of  England 
loses  identity  if  it  becomes  a  history  of  Europe. 
But  Carlyle's  principles,  whether  he  always  acted 
upon  them  himself  or  no,  are  excellent,  and, 
though  Froude's  second  chapter  was  not  quite  re- 
written, the  effect  of  them  may  be  seen  in  the  rest 
of  the  book. 

Carlyle's  influence  upon  Froude,  which  happily 
never  extended  to  his  style,  confirmed  him  in  his 
attachment  to  Protestantism  and  his  hatred  of 
Rome.  It  also  accounted  for  much  of  Froude's 


THE    HISTORY  87 

belief  in  despots.  In  democracy  he  had  no 
faith.  Manhood  suffrage  in  England,  would, 
he  thought,  even  in  the  wonderful  year  1588, 
the  last  of  his  History,  have  restored  the  Pope. 
This  was  perhaps  a  little  inconsistent  with  his 
theory  that  Henry  VIII.  had  been  popular  with 
all  classes.  Yet  at  least  Froude  could  distin- 
guish one  despot  from  another.  He  was  entirely 
opposed,  as  we  have  seen,  to  the  alliance  with 
Louis  Napoleon  against  Russia,  which  culminated 
in  the  Crimean  War.  Otherwise  his  sympathy 
with  Liberalism  was  chiefly  academic.  He  re- 
joiced in  the  University  Commission,  and  in 
the  consequent  removal  of  religious  tests  for 
undergraduates.  But  he  took  Carlyle's  Latter- 
Day  Pamphlets  for  gospel,  and  had  no  faith 
in  peace  by  great  Exhibitions,  or  progress  by 
political  reform.  The  war  with  Russia  justified 
the  first  part  of  his  creed,  and  even  Liberals  in 
the  House  of  Commons  seemed  tacitly  to  agree 
with  the  second.  To  the  glorification  of  mere 
money-making,  the  worship  of  the  golden  calf, 
the  sincerest  and  the  most  fashionable  of  all  wor- 
ships, both  he  and  Carlyle  were  equally  opposed. 
They  were  agreed  with  the  Socialists  and  with 
Ruskin  in  their  dislike  of  seeing  bricks  and  mortar 
substituted  for  green  fields,  smoky  chimneys  for 
church  towers,  myriads  of  factory  hands  for  the 
rural  population  of  England.  Carlyle  still  called 
himself  a  Radical,  a  believer  in  root  and  branch 
change,  but  moral  rather  than  political.  His  faith 


88  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

in  representative  institutions  had  been  shaken  by 
reflecting  that  the  Long  Parliament,  the  best  ever 
assembled  in  England,  would  have  given  up  the 
cause  of  the  Civil  War  if  it  had  not  been  for 
Cromwell  and  the  army.  Although  he  had  been 
one  of  Peel's  warmest  supporters  in  1846,  he  had 
come  to  dread  Liberalism  as  tending  towards 
anarchy,  and  he  adopted  the  singular  verbal  fallacy 
that  a  low  franchise  would  mean  a  low  standard 
of  politics.  Froude,  though  he  still  called  him- 
self a  Liberal,  and  in  some  respects  always  was 
so,  swore  by  Carlyle,  acknowledged  him  as  his 
master,  and  repeated  his  creed.  Carlyle  had 
many  admirers,  but  few  disciples,  and  he  naturally 
set  great  value  on  Froude' s  adhesion.  He  had 
always  a  great  contempt  for  universal  suffrage. 
It  would  have  given,  he  said  grimly,  the  same  voice 
in  the  government  of  Palestine  to  Jesus  Christ 
and  to  Judas  Iscariot.  But  whatever  might  have 
happened  to  Judas,  the  Son  of  man  had  not  where 
to  lay  His  head,  and  would  certainly  have  been 
excluded  under  any  system  which  met  the  approval 
of  Carlyle.  In  Latter-Day  Pamphlets  Carlyle  had 
made  a  tremendous  attack  upon  Downing  Street, 
and  the  administrative  deficiencies  which  the 
Crimean  campaign  disclosed  could  be  treated  as 
confirmatory  evidence  in  his  favour.  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  Lord  Aberdeen  and  Lord  Palmerston  were 
all  the  same  to  him.  He  was  denouncing  the 
Parliamentary  system,  which  has  borne  up  against 
worse  Ministers  than  the  Duke  of  Newcastle.  If 


THE    HISTORY  89 

Sebastopol  had  been  taken  after  the  Alma,  as  it 
well  might  have  been,  Carlyle  would  not  have 
altered  his  tone.  Nothing  would  have  prevented 
him  from  delivering  his  message,  or  Froude  from 
accepting  it. 

The  first  two  volumes  of  the  History  appeared 
in  1856.  They  dealt  with  the  latter  part  of 
Henry's  reign,  when  he  had  rid  himself  of  Wolsey, 
and  was  personally  ruling  England  with  the  aid 
of  Thomas  Cromwell.  Froude  had  to  describe 
the  dissolution  of  the  monasteries,  and  besides 
describing  he  justified  it.  He  had  to  depict  the 
absolute  government  of  Henry  ;  and  he  argued 
that  it  was  a  necessity  of  the  times.  We  must 
not  transfer  the  passions  of  one  age  to  the  con- 
troversies of  another.  In  the  seventeenth  century 
the  issue  was  between  the  Stuart  kings  and  their 
Parliaments,  or,  in  other  words,  between  the  Crown 
and  the  people.  In  the  sixteenth  century  king 
and  Parliament  were  united  against  an  alien 
power,  the  Catholic  Church,  and  a  foreign  prince, 
the  Pope.  Before  England  was  free  she  had  to 
become  Protestant,  and  Henry,  whatever  his 
motives,  was  on  the  Protestant  side.  That  he 
was  himself  an  unscrupulous  tyrant  is  beside  the 
point.  He  was  an  ephemeral  phenomenon,  and, 
as  a  matter  of  fact,  his  tyranny,  which  the  people 
never  felt,  died  with  him.  The  Church  of  Rome 
was  a  permanent  fact,  immortal,  if  not  unchange- 
able, which  would  have  reduced  England,  if  it 
had  prevailed,  to  the  condition  of  France,  Italy, 


go  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

and  Spain.  Whether  Henry  VIII.  was  a  good 
man,  or  a  bad  one,  is  not  the  question.  Bishop 
Stubbs,  who  cannot  be  accused  of  anti-eccle- 
siastical, or  anti-theological  prejudice,  calls  him 
a  "  grand,  gross  figure,"  not  to  be  tried  and  con- 
demned by  ordinary  standards  of  private  morals. 
The  only  interest  of  his  character  now  is  its  bearing 
upon  the  fate  of  England.  If  the  Pope,  and  not 
the  king,  had  become  head  of  the  English  Church, 
would  it  have  been  for  the  advantage  of  the  English 
people  ?  By  frankly  taking  the  king's  side 
Froude  made  two  different  and  influential  sets 
of  enemies,  especially  at  Oxford.  High  Church- 
men, then  and  for  the  rest  of  his  life,  assailed 
him  for  hostility  to  "  the  Church,"  forgetting  or 
ignoring  the  fact  that  the  Church  of  England  is 
not  the  Church  of  Rome.  Liberals,  on  the 
other  hand,  mistook  him  for  a  friend  of  lawless 
despotism,  as  if  Henry's  opponents  had  been 
constitutional  statesmen,  and  not  arrogant 
Churchmen,  hating  liberty  even  more  than  he 
did. 

That  Froude  had  no  faith  in  modern  Liberalism 
is  true  enough.  His  political  leader  in  1856  was 
neither  Palmerston  nor  Cobden,  but  Carlyle. 
In  1529  he  would  have  been  a  King's  man  and 
not  a  Pope's  man,  an  Englishman  first  and  a 
Churchman  afterwards.  Lord  Melbourne  used 
to  declare,  in  his  paradoxical  manner,  that 
Henry  VIII.  was  the  greatest  man  who  ever 
lived,  because  he  always  had  his  own  way. 


THE    HISTORY  91 

Strength  is  not  greatness,  and  Melbourne  must 
not  be  taken  literally.  What  can  be  pleaded 
for  Henry,  without  paradox  and  with  truth, 
is  that  he  imposed  upon  Catholic  and  Protestant 
alike  the  supremacy  of  the  law.  Froude  preached 
the  subordination  of  the  Church  to  the  State  ; 
and  while  supporters  of  the  voluntary  principle 
regarded  him  with  suspicion,  adherents  to  the 
sacerdotal  principle  shrank  from  him  with 
horror. 

The  reviews  of  Froude' s  earliest  volumes  were 
mostly  unfavourable.  The  Times  indeed  was  ap- 
preciative and  sympathetic.  But  The  Christian 
Remembrancer  was  emphatic  in  its  censure, 
and  The  Edinburgh.  Review,  of  which  Henry 
Reeve  had  just  become  editor,  was  vehemently 
hostile. 

After  all,  however,  an  author  depends,  not  upon 
this  party,  nor  upon  that  party,  but  upon  the 
general  public.  The  public  took  to  Froude' s 
History  from  the  first.  They  took  to  it  because  it 
interested  them,  and  carried  them  on.  Paradoxi- 
cal it  might  be.  Partial  it  might  be.  Readable 
it  undoubtedly  was.  Parker's  confidence  was  more 
than  justified.  The  book  sold  as  no  history  had 
sold  except  Gibbon's  and  Macaulay's.  There  were 
no  obscure,  no  ugly  sentences.  The  reader  was 
carried  down  the  stream  with  a  motion  all  the 
pleasanter  because  it  was  barely  perceptible.  The 
name  of  the  author  was  in  all  mouths.  His  old 
college  perceived  that  he  was  a  credit,  not  a 


92  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

disgrace  to  it,  and  the  Rector  of  Exeter1  courteously 
invited  him  to  replace  his  name  on  the  books. 
The  Committee  of  the  Athenaeum  elected  him  an 
honorary  member  of  the  Club.  Even  the  Arch- 
deacon, now  a  very  old  man,  discovered  at  last 
that  his  youngest  son  was  an  honour  to  the  name 
of  Froude.  He  knew  something  of  ecclesiastical 
history,  and  he  understood  that  the  character 
of  Henry,  which  certainly  left  much  to  be  de- 
sired, might  have  been  blackened  of  set  purpose 
by  ecclesiastical  historians.  Froude' s  reputation 
was  made.  The  reviewers,  most  of  whom  knew 
nothing  about  the  subject,  could  not  hurt  him. 
He  had  followed  his  bent,  and  chosen  his  voca- 
tion well.  The  gift  of  narrative  was  his,  and 
he  had  had  thoughts  of  turning  novelist.  But 
to  write  a  novel,  or  at  least  a  successful  novel, 
was  a  thing  he  could  never  do.  He  had 
not  the  spirit  of  romance.  If  there  was  any- 
thing romantic  in  him,  it  was  love  of  England, 
and  of  the  sea.  From  the  ocean  rovers  of  Eliza- 
beth to  the  colonial  path-finders  of  his  own  day, 
he  delighted  in  men  who  carried  the  name  and 
fame  of  England  to  distant  places  of  the  earth. 
He  was  an  advocate  rather  than  a  judge.  He 
held  so  strongly  the  correctness  of  his  own  views, 
and  the  importance  of  having  a  right  judgment 
in  all  things,  that  he  sometimes  gave  undue  pro- 
minence to  the  facts  which  supported  his  theory. 
It  was  only  fair  and  reasonable  that  critics  should 

1  Dr.  Lightfoot. 


THE    HISTORY  93 

draw  attention  to  this  characteristic  of  Froude 
as  an  historian.  That  he  deliberately  falsified 
history  is  a  baseless  delusion.  A  sterner  moralist, 
a  more  strenuous  worker,  it  would  have  been 
difficult  to  find.  An  artist  he  could  not  help 
being,  for  it  was  in  the  blood.  Once  his  fingers 
grasped  the  pen,  they  began  instinctively  to 
draw  a  picture.  He  was  not,  like  Macaulay, 
a  rhetorician.  He  had  inherited  from  his  father 
a  contempt  for  oratory,  and  he  did  not  speak  well 
in  public.  But  when  he  had  studied  a  period 
he  saw  it  in  a  series  of  moving  scenes  as  the 
figures  passed  along  the  stage.  That  he  was  not 
always  accurate  in  detail  is  notorious.  Accuracy 
is  a  question  of  degree.  There  are  mistakes 
in  Macaulay.  There  are  mistakes  in  Gibbon. 
Humanum  est  err  are.  An  historian  must  be  judged 
not  by  the  number  of  slips  he  has  made  in  names 
or  dates,  but  by  the  general  conformity  of  his 
representation  with  the  object.  Canaletto  painted 
pictures  of  Venice  in  which  there  was  not  a  palace 
out  of  drawing,  nor  a  brick  out  of  place.  Yet  not 
all  Canaletto' s  Venetian  pictures  would  give  a 
stranger  much  idea  of  the  atmosphere  of  Venice. 
Glance  at  one  Turner,  in  which  a  Venetian  could 
hardly  identify  a  building  or  a  canal,  and  there 
lies  before  you  the  Queen  of  the  Sea.  Serious 
blunders  have  been  discovered  by  microscopic 
criticism  in  Carlyle's  French  Revolution ;  it  remains 
the  most  vivid  and  impressive  version  of  a 
tremendous  drama  that  has  ever  been  given  to 


94  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

the  world.  Froude  and  Carlyle  had  the  same 
scorn  of  the  multitude,  the  same  belief  in 
destiny,  the  same  love  of  truth.  Froude  was 
more  sceptical,  less  inclined  to  hero-worship, 
far  more  academic  in  thought  and  style.  They 
agreed  in  setting  the  moral  lessons  of  history 
above  any  theory  of  scientific  development,  and 
in  cultivating  the  human  interest  of  the  narrative 
as  that  which  alone  abides. 

That  Froude  set  out  with  a  polemical  purpose 
is  not  to  be  denied.  He  had  seen  enough  of  the 
Romanist  or  Anglican  revival  to  dislike  it  heartily, 
and  he  held  that  Protestant  countries  were  the 
most  prosperous  because  they  were  morally  the 
best.  Although  he  did  not  accept  the  Evangelical 
theology,  he  thought  Calvinism  the  most  philo- 
sophic form  of  religious  belief,  and  Puritanism 
the  soundest  sort  of  ethical  creed.  The  Church 
of  England  as  understood  by  his  father  was  to 
him  the  healthiest  of  ecclesiastical  institutions, 
teaching  godliness,  inculcating  duty,  saying  as 
little  as  possible  about  dogma.  Religion,  he  said, 
was  meant  to  be  obeyed,  not  to  be  examined. 
The  sun  was  invaluable,  unless  you  looked  at  it. 
If  you  looked  at  it,  you  saw  neither  it  nor  any- 
thing else.  But  for  the  Reformation,  England, 
like  France,  might  be  under  a  worthless  despot 
sanctified  by  the  Church,  or,  like  Spain,  be 
trampled  under  the  feet  of  priests.  The  statutes 
of  Henry  VIII.  were  the  title-deeds  of  the  English 
Church.  Henry  established  the  supremacy  of 


THE    HISTORY  95 

the  State  by  letters  patent,  pr&munire,  and 
conge  d'elire.  The  old  bluebeard  Henry,  who 
spent  his  whole  time  in  murdering  his  wives, 
was  a  nursery  toy.  The  real  Henry  put  two 
wives  to  death  by  lawful  means  on  definite  and 
substantial  charges  of  which  death  was  the 
penalty.  His  subjects  were  quite  as  anxious  as 
he  could  be  that  he  should  have  a  male  heir,  and 
few  now  suppose  that  Anne  Boleyn,  or  Katharine 
Howard,  was  faithful  to  her  husband.  The 
Church  of  Rome  would  have  dethroned  Henry 
and  incited  his  subjects  to  rebellion.  It  was 
war  to  the  knife,  and  the  King  won. 

Froude  regarded  Henry's  victory  as  the  salvation 
of  England.  The  dissolution  of  the  monasteries 
was  an  incident  in  the  struggle,  necessary  for  the 
public  interest,  and  justified  by  the  evidence. 
Although  part  of  their  confiscated  property  was 
bestowed  upon  statesmen  and  courtiers,  part  went 
to  found  new  Cathedral  colleges,  or  grammar 
schools,  and  part  to  strengthen  the  national 
defences.  Henry  was  a  strange  mixture,  quite 
as  much  patriot  as  tyrant,  and  not  safe  enough 
on  his  throne  to  tolerate  Popery.  In  Froude's 
view  he  stood  for  the  nation.  More  and  Fisher 
were  for  a  foreign  power.  The  time  with 
which  Froude  chose  to  deal  was  full  of  blazing 
fire,  which  the  ashes  of  three  hundred  years  im- 
perfectly covered.  He  did  not  realise  the  ordeal 
to  which  he  was  exposing  himself,  the  malice  he 
was  stirring  up.  His  whole  life  had  been  a  pre- 


96  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

paration  for  the  task.  When  he  had  the  free  run 
of  his  father's  library  after  leaving  Westminster, 
it  was  to  the  historical  shelves  that  he  went  first ; 
and  while  his  brother  talked  eloquently  about 
the  evils  of  the  Reformation,  he  himself  was 
studying  its  causes.  His  own  entanglement  in 
the  Anglican  revival  was  personal,  accidental, 
and  brief.  It  was  due  entirely  to  his  affectionate 
admiration  for  Newman,  aided  perhaps,  if  by 
anything,  by  curiosity  to  know  something  about 
the  lives  of  the  saints.  For  a  real  saint,  such 
as  Hugh  of  Lincoln,  he  had  a  sincere  reverence, 
and  loved  to  show  it.  The  miraculous  element 
disgusted  him,  and  the  more  he  read  of  ecclesi- 
astical performances  the  more  anti-ecclesiastical 
he  became. 

The  article  in  The  Edinburgh  Review  for  July, 
1858,  upon  Froude's  first  four  volumes  is  an 
elaborate,  an  able,  and  a  bitter  attack.  Henry 
Reeve,  the  editor  of  The  Edinburgh  at  that  time, 
and  for  many  years  afterwards,  was  not  himself 
a  scholar,  like  his  illustrious  predecessor,  Cornewall 
Lewis.  He  was  a  Whig  of  the  most  conventional 
type,  regarding  Macaulay  and  Hallam  as  the 
ideal  historians,  suspicious  of  novelty,  and  dis- 
mayed by  paradox.  Froude's  critic  belonged 
to  a  more  advanced  school  of  Liberalism,  and 
shuddered  at  the  glorification  of  a  "  tyrant " 
like  Henry  VIII.  That  he  had  also  some  reason 
for  personally  detesting  Froude  is  plain  from  his 
malicious  references  to  the  Lives  of  the  Saints, 


THE    HISTORY  97 

and  to  The  Nemesis  of  Faith,  which  Froude 
himself  had,  so  far  as  he  could,  suppressed. 
When  Froude's  name  was  restored  to  the  books 
of  Exeter  College  in  1858,  he  wrote  to  Dr. 
Lightfoot,  the  Rector,  that  he  regretted  the 
publication  both  of  The  Nemesis  and  of  Shadows 
of  the  Clouds.  His  object  in  future,  he  added, 
would  be  to  defend  the  Church  of  England.  That 
his  idea  of  the  Church  was  the  same  as  Light- 
foot's  is  improbable.  Froude  meant  the  Church 
of  the  Reformation,  of  private  judgment,  of  an 
open  Bible,  of  lay  independence  of  bishop  or 
priest.  To  that  Church  he  was  faithful,  and  he 
sympathised  in  sentiment,  if  he  did  not  agree 
in  dogma,  with  evangelical  Christians.  With 
Catholics,  Roman  or  Anglican,  he  neither  had 
nor  pretended  to  have  any  sympathy  at  all.  The 
Reformation  is  a  convenient  name  for  a  complex 
European  movement,  difficult  to  describe,  and 
almost  impossible  to  define ;  but  so  far  as  it  was 
English  and  constitutional,  it  is  embodied  in  the 
legislation  of  Henry  VIII.,  which  substituted  the 
supremacy  of  the  Crown  for  the  supremacy  of 
the  Pope.  It  was  because  Froude  wrote  avowedly 
in  defence  of  that  change  that  he  incurred  the 
bitter  hostility  of  a  powerful  section  in  the  English 
Church.  He  also  irritated,  partly  perhaps  because 
his  tone  betrayed  the  influence  of  Carlyle,  a  large 
body  of  Liberal  opinion  to  which  all  despotism 
and  persecution  were  obnoxious.  The  compliments, 
the  reluctant  compliments,  of  The  Edinburgh  re- 

(3310)  7 


98  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

viewer  must  be  taken  as  the  admissions  of  an 
enemy.  He  acknowledges  fully  and  frankly 
the  thoroughness  of  Froude's  research  among 
the  State  Papers  of  the  reign,  not  merely  those 
printed  and  published  by  Robert  Lemon,  but 
"  a  large  manuscript  collection  of  copies  of  letters, 
minutes  of  council,  theological  tracts,  parlia- 
mentary petitions,  depositions  upon  trials,  and 
miscellaneous  communications  upon  the  state  of 
the  country  furnished  by  agents  of  the  Govern- 
ment, all  relating  to  the  early  years  of  the  English 
Reformation."  No  historian  has  ever  been  more 
diligent  than  Froude  was  in  reading  and  collating 
manuscripts.  For  Henry's  reign  alone  he  read 
and  transcribed  six  hundred  and  eighty-seven 
pages  in  his  small,  close  handwriting.  That  in 
so  doing,  and  in  working  without  assistance,  he 
should  sometimes  fall  into  error  was  unavoidable. 
But  he  never  spared  himself.  He  was  the  most 
laborious  of  students,  and  his  History  was  as 
difficult  to  write  as  it  is  easy  to  read.  He  had, 
as  this  hostile  reviewer  says,  a  "  genuine  love  of 
historical  research,"  and  there  is  point  in  the 
same  critic's  complaint  that  his  pages  are 
"over-loaded  with  long  quotations  from  State 
Papers." 

What,  then,  it  will  be  asked,  was  the  real  gist  of 
the  charges  made  against  Froude  by  The  Edinburgh 
Review  ?  The  question  at  issue  was  nothing  less 
than  the  whole  policy  of  Henry's  reign,  and  the 
motives  of  the  King.  The  character  of  Henry 


THE    HISTORY  99 

is  one  of  the  most  puzzling  in  historical  literature, 
and  Froude  had  to  deal  with  the  most  difficult 
part  of  it.  To  the  virtues  of  his  earlier  days 
Erasmus  is  an  unimpeachable  witness.  The  power 
of  his  mind  and  the  excellence  of  his  education 
are  beyond  dispute.  He  held  the  Catholic 
faith,  he  was  not  naturally  cruel,  and,  compared 
with  Francis  I.,  or  with  Henry  of  Navarre,  he 
was  not  licentious.  But  he  was  brought  up  to 
believe  that  the  ordinary  rules  of  morality  do 
not  govern  kings.  That  the  king  can  do  no 
wrong  is  now  a  maxim  of  the  Constitution,  and 
merely  means  that  Ministers  are  responsible  for 
the  acts  of  the  Crown.  Henry  could  scarcely 
have  been  made  to  understand,  even  if  there  had 
been  any  one  to  tell  him,  what  a  constitutional 
monarch  was.  Though  forced  to  admit,  and 
taught  by  experience,  that  he  could  not  safely 
tax  his  subjects  without  the  formal  sanction  of 
Parliament,  he  was  in  theory  absolute,  and  he 
held  it  his  duty  to  rule  as  well  as  to  reign.  When 
Charles  I.  argued,  a  century  later,  that  a  king 
was  not  bound  to  keep  faith  with  his  subjects, 
it  may  be  doubted  whether  he  deceived  himself. 
The  thoughts  of  men  are  widened  with  the  process 
of  the  suns.  His  duty  to  God  Henry  would 
always  have  acknowledged.  A  historian  so  widely 
different  from  Froude  as  Bishop  Stubbs  has 
pointed  out  that,  if  mere  self-indulgence  had  been 
the  king's  object,  the  infinite  pains  he  took  to  obtain 
a  Papal  divorce  from  Katharine  of  Aragon  would 


ioo  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

have  been  thrown  away.  That  he  had  a  duty 
to  his  neighbour,  male  or  female,  never  entered 
his  head.  His  subjects  were  his  own,  to  deal  with 
as  he  pleased.  Revolting  as  this  theory  may 
seem  now,  it  was  held  by  most  people  then,  and 
there  was  not  a  man  in  England,  not  Sir  Thomas 
More  himself,  who  would  have  told  the  King  that 
it  was  untrue. 

It  is  with  the  divorce  of  Katharine  that  the 
difficulty  of  estimating  Henry  begins.  Froude's 
narrative  sets  out  with  the  marriage  of  Anne 
Boleyn.  Here  the  reviewer  plants  his  first  arrow. 
The  divorce  was  a  nullity,  having  no  authority 
higher  than  Cranmer's.  Anne  Boleyn,  as  is 
likely  enough  from  other  causes,  was  never  the 
King's  wife,  and  Elizabeth  was  illegitimate,  though 
she  had  of  course  a  Parliamentary  title  to  the 
throne.  It  seems  clear,  however,  that  inasmuch 
as  Katharine  had  been  his  brother  Prince  Arthur's 
wife,  the  King  could  not  lawfully  marry  her, 
according  to  the  canons  of  the  Catholic  Church. 
Why  did  he  marry  Anne  Boleyn  ?  The  reviewer 
says  because  he  was  in  love  with  her,  and  triumph- 
antly refers  to  the  King's  letters,  printed  in  the 
Appendix  of  Hearne's  Avesbury.1  They  are  un- 
doubtedly love-letters,  and  they  contain  one 
indelicate  expression.  Compared  with  Mirabeau's 
letters  to  Sophie  de  Monnier,  they  are  cold  and 
chaste.  Froude  says  that  the  King  wanted  a 
male  heir,  and  he  gives  the  same  reason  for  the 

1  Oxford,  1720. 


THE    HISTORY  101 

scandalously  indecent  haste  with  which  Jane  Sey- 
mour was  married  the  day  after  Anne's  execution. 
The  character  of  Henry  VIII.  is  only  important 
now  as  it  bears  upon  the  policy  of  his  reign.  That 
Froude  washed  him  too  white  is  almost  as  certain 
as  that  Lingard  painted  him  too  black.  The 
notion  that  lust  supplies  the  key  to  his  marriages 
and  their  consequences  is  utterly  ridiculous.  The 
most  dissolute  of  English  kings  was  content,  and 
more  than  content,  with  one  wife.  On  the  other 
hand,  Froude  does  at  least  give  a  clue  when  he 
suggests  that  these  frequent  marriages  were 
political  moves.  A  female  sovereign  reigning  in 
her  own  right  had  never  been  known  in  England, 
and  up  to  the  birth  of  Jane  Seymour's  son  Edward 
the  whole  kingdom  passionately  desired  that 
there  should  be  a  Prince  of  Wales.  Edward 
himself  was  but  a  sickly  child,  and  was  not  ex- 
pected to  live  even  for  the  short  span  of  his  actual 
career.  Credulous  indeed  must  they  be  who 
maintain  the  innocence  either  of  Anne  Boleyn 
or  of  Katharine  Howard,  and  there  seems  small 
use  in  holding  with  the  learned  Father  Gasquet 
that  Anne  was  not  guilty  of  the  offences  imputed 
to  her,  but  had  done  something  too  bad  to  be 
mentioned  on  a  trial  for  incest.  It  is  a  question 
of  evidence,  and  the  evidence  is  lost.  But  the 
Grand  Jury  which  presented  Anne  was  respectable, 
the  Court  which  convicted  her  was  distinguished, 
and  neither  she  nor  any  of  her  paramours  denied 
their  guilt  on  the  scaffold.  Simple  adultery  in 


102  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

a  queen  was  capital  then,  if  indeed  it  be  not 
capital  now.  In  an  ordinary  husband  Henry's 
conduct  would  have  been  revolting.  It  is  not 
attractive  in  him.  Stubbs  pleads  that  we  cannot 
judge  him,  and  abandons  the  attempt  in  despair. 
As  he  rejects  with  equal  decision  both  the  Roman 
Catholic  picture  and  Froude's,  he  only  puts  us  all 
to  ignorance  again.  Froude  is  at  least  intelligible. 
It  is  a  fact,  and  not  a  fancy,  that  Henry  provided 
from  the  spoils  of  the  monasteries  for  the  defence 
of  the  realm,  that  he  founded  new  bishoprics 
from  the  same  source,  that  he  disarmed  the 
ecclesiastical  tribunals,  and  broke  the  bonds  of 
Rome.  The  corruption  of  at  least  the  smaller 
monasteries,  some  of  which  were  suppressed  by 
Wolsey  before  the  rise  of  Cromwell,  is  established 
by  the  balance  of  evidence,  and  the  disappearance 
of  the  Black  Book  which  set  forth  their  condition 
was  only  to  be  expected  in  the  reign  of  Mary. 
The  crime  which  weighs  most  upon  the  memory 
of  the  King  is  the  execution  of  Fisher  and  More. 
More,  though  he  persecuted  heretics,  is  the  saint 
and  philosopher  of  the  age.  Of  Fisher  Macaulay 
says  that  he  was  worthy  to  have  lived  in  a  better 
age,  and  died  in  a  better  cause.  But  what  if  these 
good  men,  from  purely  conscientious  motives, 
would  have  brought  over  a  Spanish  army  to 
coerce  their  Protestant  fellow-subjects  and  their 
lawful  sovereign  ?  That,  and  not  speculative 
error,  is  the  real  charge  against  them.  Henry 
did  all  he  could  to  put  himself  in  the  wrong.  His 


THE    HISTORY  103 

atrocious  request  that  More  "  would  not  use  many 
words  on  the  scaffold  "  makes  one  hate  him  after 
the  lapse  of  well-nigh  four  hundred  years.  The 
question,  however,  is  not  one  of  personal  feeling. 
Good  men  go  wrong.  Bad  men  are  made  by 
Providence  to  be  instruments  for  good.  It  is 
not  More,  nor  Fisher,  it  is  the  Bluebeard  of  the 
children's  history-books  who  gave  England  Miles 
Coverdale's  Bible,  who  freed  her  from  the  yoke 
that  oppressed  France  till  the  Revolution,  and 
oppresses  Spain  to-day.  Froude's  first  four 
volumes  are  an  eloquent  indictment  of  Ultra- 
montanism,  a  plea  for  the  Reformation,  a  sustained 
argument  for  English  liberties  and  freedom  of 
thought.  No  such  book  can  be  impartial  in  the 
sense  of  admitting  that  there  is  as  much  to  be 
said  on  one  side  as  on  the  other.  Froude  replied 
to  The  Edinburgh  Review  in  Fraser's  Magazine 
for  September,  1858,  and  in  the  following  month 
the  reviewer  retorted.  He  did  not  really  shake 
the  foundation  of  Froude's  case,  which  was  the 
same  as  Luther's.  Luther,  like  Froude,  was  no 
democrat.  To  both  of  them  the  Reformation 
was  a  protest  against  ecclesiastical  tyranny,  or 
for  spiritual  freedom.  '  The  comedy  has  ended 
in  a  marriage,"  said  Erasmus  of  Luther  and 
Luther's  wife.  It  was  not  a  comedy,  and  it  had 
not  ended. 

Froude  sometimes  goes  too  far.  When  he  de- 
fends the  Boiling  Act,  under  which  human  beings 
were  actually  boiled  alive  in  Smithfield,  he  shakes 


104  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

confidence  in  his  judgment.  He  sets  too  much 
value  upon  the  verdicts  of  Henry's  tribunals, 
forgetting  Macaulay's  emphatic  declaration  that 
State  trials  before  1688  were  murder  under  the 
forms  of  law.  Although  the  subject  of  his  Prize 
Essay  at  Oxford  was  "  The  Influence  of  the  Science 
of  Political  Economy  upon  the  Moral  and  Social 
Welfare  of  a  Nation,"  he  never  to  the  end  of  his 
life  understood  what  political  economy  was. 
Misled  by  Carlyle,  he  conceived  it  to  be  a  sort  of 
"  Gospel,"  a  rival  system  to  the  Christian  religion, 
instead  of  useful  generalisations  from  the  observed 
course  of  trade.  He  never  got  rid  of  the  idea  that 
Governments  could  fix  the  rate  of  wages  and  the 
price  of  goods.  A  more  serious  fault  found  by  The 
Edinburgh  reviewer,  the  ablest  of  all  Froude's 
critics,  was  the  implication  rather  than  the 
assertion  that  Henry  VIII.'s  Parliaments  repre- 
sented the  people.  The  House  of  Commons  in 
the  sixteenth  century  was  really  chosen  through 
the  Sheriffs  by  the  Crown,  and  the  preambles  of 
the  Statutes,  upon  which  Froude  relied  as  evidence 
of  contemporary  opinion,  showed  the  opinion  of  the 
Government  rather  than  the  opinion  of  the  people. 
They  are  not  of  course  on  that  account  to  be 
neglected.  Although  the  House  of  Commons 
was  no  result  of  popular  election,  it  consisted 
of  representative  Englishmen,  who  would  hardly 
have  acquiesced  in  statements  notoriously  untrue. 
Henry  neither  obtained  nor  asked  the  opinion  of 
the  people,  as  we  understand  the  phrase.  The 


THE    HISTORY  105 

"  dim  common  populations  "  had  no  more  to  do 
with  the  Government  of  England  then  than  they 
have  to  do  with  the  Government  of  India  now. 
At  the  same  time  it  must  be  remembered  that  the 
King  could  not  rely  upon  mere  force.  He  had 
no  standing  army,  and  a  popular  rising  would 
have  swept  him  almost  without  resistance  from 
his  throne.  It  is  almost  as  hard  for  us  to  imagine 
his  position  as  to  understand  his  character.  Par- 
liament, judges,  magistrates,  were  subordinate 
to  his  sovereign  will  and  pleasure.  From  the 
authority  of  the  Pope  he  cut  himself  free,  and 
neither  Clement  VII.  nor  Paul  III.  was  strong 
enough  to  stand  up  against  him.  He  could  hold 
his  own  with  France,  with  the  Empire,  with  Spain. 
The  one  Power  he  never  ventured  to  defy  was  the 
English  people.  It  was  the  essence  of  the  Tudor 
monarchy  to  rely  upon  the  masses  rather  than  the 
classes,  to  keep  the  aristocracy  down  by  expressing 
the  popular  will.  So  far  as  Henry  took  part  in 
it,  the  Reformation  was  not  religious  at  all.  As 
Macaulay  drily  remarks,  he  was  a  good  Catholic  who 
preferred  to  be  his  own  Pope.  He  knew  very  well 
that  Englishmen  would  like  him  none  the  worse 
for  resisting  the  pretensions  of  Rome,  for  insisting 
on  the  royal  supremacy,  for  taking  every  possible 
step  to  secure  the  succession  in  the  male  Tudor 
line.  If  in  his  callous  indifference  to  the  fate  of 
the  men  or  women  who  stood  in  his  way  he  appears 
scarcely  human,  we  must  consider,  with  Bishop 
Stubbs,  his  awful  isolation.  The  whole  burden  of 


106  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

the  State  was  upon  him,  and  he  could  not  share 
it.  Not  till  the  reign  of  his  elder  daughter  did  his 
subjects  realise  the  horrors  from  which  he  had 
delivered  them. 

Hostile  criticism,  though  it  affected  the  opinion 
of  scholars,  did  Froude  no  harm  with  the  public. 
Macaulay's  popularity  was  at  its  height  in  1858. 
But  Macaulay  passes  lightly  in  his  Introduction 
over  the  sixteenth  century,  and  the  reign  of 
Henry  VIII.,  or  at  least  the  latter  part  of  it,  had 
never  been  so  copiously  illustrated  before.  The 
Oxford  Movement,  which  treated  the  Reformation 
as  a  discreditable  incident  worthy  of  oblivion,  had 
not  much  influence  with  the  laity.  Nine  English- 
men in  ten  were  quite  prepared  to  glorify  the 
reformers,  and  were  by  no  means  sorry  to  find 
how  much  evidence  there  was  for  the  good  old 
English  view  of  a  Parliamentary  Church.  The 
Statutes  of  Supremacy  and  of  Prcemunire,  even 
the  execution  of  More  and  Fisher,  reminded  them 
that  the  Bishop  of  Rome  neither  had  nor  ought 
to  have  any  jurisdiction  within  this  realm  of 
England.  That  "  gospel  light  first  dawned  from 
Boleyn's  eyes "  might  be  a  paradox.  It  was, 
however,  a  paradox  which  contained  a  truth,  and 
it  was  by  no  means  disagreeable  to  find  that  a 
popular  king  was  not  a  mere  monster  of  iniquity. 
If  Henry  had  been  what  Catholic  historians 
represented  him,  the  mob  would  have  pulled  his 
palace  about  his  ears. 

The    public   bought   the  book,    and    read   it  ; 


THE    HISTORY  107 

for  the  style,  though  very  unlike  Macaulay's, 
was  quite  as  easy  to  read.  In  1860  appeared 
the  two  volumes  dealing  with  Edward  VI.  and 
Mary,  which  complete  the  former  half  of  this 
great  book.  After  the  brief  and  disturbed 
period  of  Edward's  minority  and  Somerset's 
Protectorate,  the  country  enjoyed  a  true  Catholic 
reign.  Whatever  may  have  been  the  religion  of 
Henry,  there  could  be  no  doubt  about  Mary's. 
Mary  had  only  one  use  for  Protestants,  and  that 
was  to  burn  them.  Among  her  first  victims  were 
Latimer  and  Ridley,  two  bright  ornaments  of 
Christian  faith  and  practice,  who  committed  the 
deadly  sin  of  believing  that  it  was  against  the 
truth  of  Christ's  natural  body  to  be  in  heaven  and 
earth  at  the  same  time.  To  them  soon  succeeded 
Cranmer,  the  father  of  the  English  liturgy,  not 
a  man  of  unblemished  character,  but  incomparably 
superior  to  Gardiner,  to  Bonner,  or  to  Pole.  For 
Cranmer  Froude  had  a  peculiar  affection,  and  his 
account  of  the  Archbishop's  martyrdom  is  unsur- 
passed by  any  other  passage  in  the  History.  I 
need  make  no  apology  for  quoting  the  end  of  it ; 
"  So  perished  Cranmer.  He  was  brought  out  with 
the  eyes  of  his  soul  blinded  to  make  sport  for  his 
enemies,  and  in  his  death  he  brought  upon  them 
a  wider  destruction  than  he  had  effected  by  his 
teaching  while  alive.  Pole  was  appointed  next 
day  to  the  See  of  Canterbury  ;  but  in  other  respects 
the  Court  had  overreached  themselves  by  their 
cruelty.  Had  they  been  contented  to  accept  the 


io8  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

recantation,  they  would  have  left  the  Archbishop 
to  die  broken-hearted,  pointed  at  by  the  finger 
of  pitying  scorn,  and  the  Reformation  would 
have  been  disgraced  in  its  champion.  They  were 
tempted,  by  an  evil  spirit  of  revenge,  into  an  act 
unsanctioned  even  by  their  own  bloody  laws  ; 
and  they  gave  him  an  opportunity  of  redeeming 
his  fame,  and  of  writing  his  name  in  the  roll  of 
martyrs.  The  worth  of  a  man  must  be  measured 
by  his  life,  not  by  his  failure  under  a  single  and 
peculiar  trial.  The  Apostle,  though  forewarned, 
denied  his  Master  on  the  first  alarm  of  danger  ; 
yet  that  Master,  who  knew  his  nature  in  its  strength 
and  its  infirmity,  chose  him  for  the  rock  on  which 
He  would  build  His  Church." 

It  used  to  be  said  of  Ernest  Renan  that  he  was 
toujours  seminariste,  and  there  is  a  flavour  of  the 
pulpit  in  these  beautiful  sentences.  Beautiful 
indeed  they  are,  and  not  more  beautiful  than  true. 
The  implacable  Mary,  whose  ghastly  epithet  clings 
to  her  for  all  time,  like  the  shirt  of  Nessus,  found 
in  Pole  an  apt  and  zealous  pupil  in  persecution. 
Both  are  excellent  specimens  of  their  Church, 
because  according  to  that  Church  they  are  abso- 
lutely blameless.  Punctilious  in  the  discharge 
of  all  religious  duties,  they  were  chaste,  sober, 
frugal,  and  honest.  They  made  long  prayers. 
They  tithed  mint,  and  anise,  and  cummin.  They 
made  clean  the  outside  of  the  cup  and  platter. 
They  firmly  believed  that  they  were  pleasing  the 
Deity  they  worshipped  when  they  deluged  England 


THE    HISTORY  109 

with  blood.  The  spirit  of  the  Marian  martyrs  is 
one  of  the  noblest  tributes  to  the  power  of  true 
religion  that  the  annals  of  Christendom  contain. 
Henry's  victims  were  few  and  conspicuous.  Their 
crime,  or  alleged  crime,  was  treason.  Mary's  were 
obscure,  and  numbered  by  the  hundred.  Many 
of  them  were  artisans  and  mechanics,  who,  as 
Burghley  afterwards  said,  knew  no  faith  except 
that  they  were  called  upon  to  abjure.  They  went 
to  the  stake  without  a  murmur,  sustained  against 
the  terrors  of  demonology  by  their  own  English 
hearts,  by  the  love  of  their  friends,  and  by  the  grace 
of  God.  Tennyson,  in  his  play  of  Queen  Mary,  has 
put  into  the  mouth  of  Pole  some  highly  edifying 
sentiments  on  the  want  of  true  faith  which  prompts 
persecution.  Pole's  example  was  very  different  from 
these  precepts.  For  the  wretched  Mary  there  may 
be  some  excuse  ;  she  was  perhaps  not  wholly  sane. 
Her  fixed  idea,  that  if  she  killed  Protestants 
enough  Heaven  would  give  her  a  son,  was  the 
conviction  of  a  lunatic.  Her  own  husband  fled 
from  her,  and  left  her  with  no  earthly  consolation 
save  the  stake.  But  Pole  was  sane  enough  when 
he  burnt  better  Christians  than  himself.  The  true 
story  of  Mary's  reign  deserved  to  be  told  as  Froude 
could  tell  it.  The  tale  has  two  sides,  and  is  a 
warning  which  has  been  taken  to  heart.  Mary's 
subjects  could  not  rebel.  Her  Spanish  husband 
had  behind  him  the  military  strength  of  a  great 
Power.  But  never  again,  except  during  the  brief 
and  disastrous  period  which  led  to  the  expulsion 


no  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

of  the  second  James,  has  England  endured  a 
Catholic  sovereign.  Neither  her  rulers  nor  her 
laws  have  always  been  just  to  Catholics.  To 
tolerate  intolerance,  though  a  truly  Christian 
lesson,  is  hard  to  learn.  Mary  Tudor  and  Reginald 
Pole  taught  the  English  people  once  for  all  what 
the  triumph  of  Catholicism  meant.  So  long  as 
they  are  not  supreme,  Catholics  are  the  best  of 
subjects,  of  citizens,  of  neighbours,  of  friends. 
There  is  only  one  country  in  Europe  where  they 
are  supreme  now,  and  that  country  is  Spain.  They 
might  have  been  supreme  in  England  for  at  least 
a  century  if  it  had  not  been  for  the  daughter  of 
Katharine  of  Aragon  and  the  Legate  of  Julius  III. 
Froude  had  now  completed  the  first  part  of 
his  great  History.  The  second  part,  the  reign 
of  Elizabeth,  was  reserved  for  future  issue  in 
separately  numbered  volumes.  The  death  of 
Macaulay  in  December,  1859,  left  Froude  the  most 
famous  of  living  English  historians,  and  the  ugly 
duckling  of  the  brood  had  become  the  glory  of 
the  family.  The  reception  of  his  first  six  volumes 
was  a  curious  one.  The  general  public  read,  and 
admired.  The  few  critics  who  were  competent  to 
form  an  instructed  and  impartial  opinion  perceived 
that,  while  there  were  errors  in  detail,  the  story 
of  the  English  Reformation,  and  of  the  Catholic 
reaction  which  followed  it,  had  been  for  the  first 
time  thoroughly  told.  Many  years  afterwards 
Froude  said  to  Tennyson  that  the  most  essential 
quality  in  an  historian  was  imagination.  This  true 


THE    HISTORY  in 

and  profound  remark  is  peculiarly  liable  to  be 
misunderstood.  People  who  do  not  know  what 
imagination  means  are  apt  to  confound  it  with 
invention,  although  the  latter  quality  is  really  the 
last  resort  of  those  who  are  destitute  of  the  former. 
Froude  was  an  ardent  lover  of  the  truth,  and  de- 
sired nothing  so  much  as  to  tell  it.  But  it  must 
be  the  truth  as  perceived  by  him,  not  as  it  might 
appear  to  others.1  His  readers  are  expected,  if 
not  to  see  with  his  eyes,  at  least  to  look  from  his 
point  of  view.  Honestly  believing  that  the  Re- 
formation was  a  great  and  beneficent  fact  in  the 
progress  of  mankind,  he  was  incapable  of  treating 
it  as  a  sinful  rebellion  against  the  authority  of 
the  Church.  Holding  Henry  VIII.,  with  all  his 
faults,  to  have  been  the  champion  of  the  laity 
against  the  clergy,  of  spiritual  and  intellectual 
freedom  against  the  Roman  yoke,  he  could  not 
represent  him  as  a  monster  of  wickedness,  tramp- 
ling on  morality  for  his  own  selfish  ends.  Doing 
full  justice  to  the  conscientiousness  of  Mary  Tudor, 
excusing  her  more  than  some  think  she  ought  to 
be  excused,  he  depicted  the  heroes  of  her  bloody 
reign  not  only  in  Latimer  and  Ridley,  but  in  the 
scores  and  hundreds  of  lowlier  persons  who  died 
for  the  faith  of  Christ. 

1  "  Shall  we  say  that  there  is  no  such  thing  as  truth  or  error, 
but  that  anything  is  true  to  a  man  which  he  troweth  ?  and 
not  rather,  as  the  solution  of  a  great  mystery,  that  truth  there 
is,  and  attainable  it  is,  but  that  its  rays  stream  in  upon  us 
through  the  medium  of  our  moral  as  well  as  our  intellectual 
being  ?" — Newman's  Grammar  of  Assent,  p.  311. 


H2  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

Protestant  as  he  was,  however,  Froude  was 
an  Englishman  first  and  a  Protestant  afterwards. 
One  might  say  of  his  history,  as  was  said  of  the 
drama  which  Tennyson  founded  upon  the  fifth 
and  sixth  volumes,  that  the  true  heroine  is  the 
English  people.  Much  of  his  popularity  was  due 
to  his  patriotism  and  his  Protestantism.  On  the 
other  hand  he  gave  deep  and  lasting  offence  to 
High  Churchmen,  which  they  neither  forgot  nor 
forgave.  They  could  not  bear  the  spectacle  of 
a  Church  established  by  statute,  of  the  king  in 
place  of  the  Pope,  of  Cromwell  and  Cranmer 
justified,  of -More  and  Fisher  condemned.  While 
not  unwilling  to  profit  by  Erastianism,  they  liked 
its  origin  kept  out  of  sight.  Bishops  appointed  by 
the  Crown  and  sitting  in  the  House  of  Lords, 
though  awkward  facts,  were  too  familiar  to  be 
upsetting.  The  secular  and  Parliamentary  origin 
of  prcemunire  and  conge  d'elire  were  less  notorious 
and  more  disagreeable  subjects.  They  were  in- 
deed to  be  found  in  Hallam.  But  Hallam  had  not 
the  popularity  or  the  influence  of  Froude.  Con- 
stitutional histories  are  for  the  learned  classes. 
Froude  wrote  for  men  of  the  world.  The  con- 
summate dexterity  of  his  style  was  only  observed 
by  trained  critics ;  its  ease  and  grace  were 
the  unconscious  delight  of  the  humblest  reader. 
Froude  gave  to  the  Protestant  cause  the  same 
sort  of  distinction  which  Newman  had  given  to 
the  Oxford  Movement.  Newman's  University 
sermons  are  neither  learned  nor  profound.  Yet 


THE    HISTORY  113 

the  preacher's  mastery  of  the  English  language  in 
all  its  rich  and  manifold  resources  has,  and  must 
always  have,  an  irresistible  charm.  The  mantle 
of  Newman  had  fallen  on  Froude,  and  Froude  had 
also  the  indefatigable  diligence  of  the  born  his- 
torian. None  of  his  mistakes  were  due  to  careless- 
ness. They  proceeded  rather  from  the  multitude 
of  the  documents  he  studied  and  the  self-reliance 
which  led  him  to  dispense  with  all  external  aid. 
He  had  of  course  friendly  reviewers,  such  as 
William  Bodham  Donne,  afterwards  Examiner  of 
Plays,in  Fraser,a.nd  Charles  Kingsley  mMacmillan. 
Kingsley,  however,  though  Lord  Palmerston  made 
him  Professor  of  Modern  History  at  Cambridge, 
was  not  altogether  the  best  ally  for  an  historian. 
It  was  in  defending  Froude  that  Kingsley  made 
his  unfortunate  attack  upon  Newman,  which  led 
to  his  own  discomfiture  in  the  first  Preface  to  the 
Apologia.  Froude  was  unable  to  support  his 
champion's  irrelevant  and  unlucky  onslaught. 
Newman's  casuistry  was  a  fair  subject  for  criticism ; 
his  personal  integrity  should  have  been  above 
suspicion,  and  Kingsley 's  insinuations  against  it 
only  recoiled  upon  himself.  No  one,  as  his  History 
shows,  could  do  ampler  justice  to  individual 
Catholics  than  Froude,  and  his  feelings  for 
Newman  were  never  altered,  either  by  disagree- 
ment or  by  time. 

The  first  part  of  the  History  had  just  been 
finished  when  a  sudden  bereavement  altered  the 
whole  course  of  Froude' s  life.  On  the  2ist  of  April, 

(3310)  8 


H4  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

1860,  Mrs.  Froude  died.  Her  religious  opinions 
had  been  very  different  from  her  husband's.  She 
had  always  leant  towards  the  Church  of  Rome, 
though  after  her  marriage  she  did  not  conform 
to  it.  He  was  probably  under  Mrs.  Froude' s 
influence  when  he  wrote  his  Essay  on  the 
Philosophy  of  Catholicism  in  1851,  reprinted 
in  the  first  series  of  Short  Studies,  which  does 
not  strike  one  as  at  all  characteristic  of  him, 
and  is  certainly  quite  different  from  his  noble  dis- 
course on  the  Book  of  Job,  published  two  years 
later.  Mrs.  Froude  never  cared  for  London,  and 
had  always  lived  in  the  country.  After  her  death 
Froude  took  for  the  first  time  a  London  house,  and 
settled  himself  with  his  children  in  the  neighbour- 
hood of  Hyde  Park. 

Later  in  the  same  year  died  his  publisher,  John 
Parker  the  younger,  of  a  painful  and  distressing 
illness,  through  which  Froude  nursed  him  with 
tender  affection.  The  elder  Parker  kept  on  the 
business,  and  brought  out  the  remaining  volumes 
of  Froude's  History.  His  son  had  been  editor  of 
Fraser's  Magazine,  and  in  that  position  Froude 
succeeded  him  at  the  beginning  of  1861.  He 
thus  found  a  regular  occupation  besides  his 
History.  Fraser  had  a  high  literary  reputation, 
and  among  its  regular  contributors  was  John 
Skelton,  writing  under  the  name  of  "  Shirley," 
who  became  one  of  Froude's  most  intimate  friends. 
In  the  Table  Talk  of  Shirley 1  are  some  interesting 

1  Blackwood,  1895. 


THE    HISTORY  115 

extracts  from  Froude's  letters,  as  well  as  a  very 
vivid  description  of  Froude  himself.  On  the 
I2th  of  January,  when  he  was  only  just  installed, 
Froude  began  a  correspondence  kept  up  for  thirty 
years  by  a  brief  note  about  Thalatta,  a  political 
romance  by  Skelton,  with  an  odd,  mixed  portrait 
of  Canning  and  Disraeli,  very  pleasant  to  read, 
but  now  almost,  I  do  not  know  why,  neglected. 
Froude  is  hardly  just  to  it.  "I  have  read 
Thalatta,"  he  writes,  "  and  now  what  shall  I  say  ? 
for  it  is  so  charming,  and  it  might  be  so  much 
more  charming.  There  is  no  mistake  about  its 
value.  The  yacht  scene  made  me  groan  over  the 
recollections  of  days  and  occupations  exactly  the 
same.  To  wander  round  the  world  in  a  hundred 
tons  schooner  would  be  my  highest  realisation 
of  human  felicity."  Even  the  name  of  the  book 
must  have  appealed  to  Froude.  For  more  than 
almost  any  other  man  of  letters  he  loved  the  sea. 
Yachting  was  his  passion.  He  pursued  it  in 
youth  despite  of  qualms,  and  in  later  life  they 
disappeared.  Constitutionally  fearless,  and  an 
excellent  sailor,  a  voyage  was  to  him  the  best  of 
holidays,  invigorating  the  body  and  refreshing 
the  brain. 

Froude  was  already  at  work  on  the  reign  of 
Elizabeth,  and  in  March,  1861,  he  went  to  Spain 
for  two  months.  This  was  the  occasion  of  his 
earliest  visit  to  Simancas,  where  he  was  allowed 
free  access  to  the  diplomatic  correspondence 
and  other  records  there  collected  and  kept.  The 


n6  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

advantage  to  Froude  of  these  documents,  especi- 
ally the  despatches  from  the  Spanish  Ambassadors 
in  London  to  the  Government  at  Madrid,  was 
enormous,  and  it  is  from  them  that  the  last 
volumes  of  the  History  derive  their  peculiar  value. 
He  used  his  opportunities  to  the  utmost,  and  his 
bulky,  voluminous  transcripts  may  be  seen  at  the 
British  Museum.  His  plan  was  to  take  rooms  at 
Valladolid,  from  which  he  drove  to  Simancas,  a 
wretched  little  village,  and  worked  for  the  day. 
The  unpublished  materials  which  he  found  at 
his  disposal  were  such  as  scarcely  any  historian 
had  ever  enjoyed  before. 

A  few  months  after  his  return  to  England,  on 
the  I2th  of  September,  1861,  he  married  his  second 
wife,  Henrietta  Warre.  Miss  Warre,  who  had 
been  his  first  wife's  intimate  friend,  was  exactly 
suited  to  him,  and  their  union  was  one  of  perfect 
happiness.  So  long  as  he  was  editor  of  Eraser, 
Froude  felt  it  his  duty  to  write  pretty  regularly 
for  it,  so  that  his  hands  were  constantly  full. 
But  of  course  his  main  business  for  the  next 
ten  years  was  the  continuation  of  his  History, 
which  involved  frequent  visits  to  Simancas,  as 
well  as  many  to  the  British  Museum,  the  Record 
Office,  and  Hatfield  House. 

From  the  Marquess  of  Salisbury,  father  of  the 
late  Prime  Minister,  Froude  received  permission 
to  search  the  Cecil  papers  at  Hatfield,  which, 
though  less  numerous  than  those  in  the  Record 
Office,  are  invaluable  to  students  of  Elizabeth's 


THE    HISTORY  117 

reign.  His  investigations  at  Hat  field  were  begun 
in  April,  1862,  and  led,  among  other  consequences, 
to  one  of  his  most  valued  friendships.  With 
Lady  Salisbury,  afterwards  Lady  Derby,  he 
kept  up  for  more  than  thirty  years  a  corre- 
spondence which  only  ended  with  his  death.  It 
was  Froude  who  introduced  Lady  Salisbury  to 
Carlyle,  and  she  thoroughly  appreciated  the 
genius  of  both.  Her  intimate  knowledge  of 
politics  was  completed  when  Lord  Derby  sat  in 
Disraeli's  Cabinet.  But  she  was  always  behind 
the  scenes,  and  it  was  from  her  that  Froude 
obtained  most  of  his  political  information.  Their 
earliest  communications,  however,  referred  to  the 
Elizabethan  part  of  the  History,  especially  to 
the  career  and  influence  of  William  Cecil,  Lord 
Burghley.  A  preliminary  letter  shows  the  thor- 
oughness of  Froude's  methods.  The  date  is  the 
5th  of  March,  1862. 

"  DEAR  LADY  SALISBURY, — If  Lord  Salisbury  has 
not  repented  of  his  kind  promise  to  me,  I  shall 
in  a  few  weeks  be  in  a  condition  to  avail  myself 
of  it,  and  I  write  to  ask  you  whether  about  the 
beginning  of  next  month  I  may  be  permitted  to 
examine  the  papers  at  Hatfield.  I  am  unwilling 
to  trouble  Lord  Salisbury  more  than  necessary. 
I  have  therefore  examined  every  other  collection 
within  my  reach  first,  that  I  might  know  clearly 
what  I  wanted.  Obliged  as  I  am  to  confine  myself 
for  the  present  to  the  first  ten  years  of  Elizabeth's 


n8  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

reign,  there  will  not  be  much  which  I  shall  have 
to  examine  there,  the  great  bulk  of  Lord  Burleigh's 
papers  for  that  time  being  in  the  Record  Office— 
but  if  I  can  be  allowed  a  few  days'  work,  I 
believe  I  can  turn  them  to  good  account.  With 
my  very  best  thanks  for  your  own  and  Lord 
Salisbury's  goodness  in  this  matter,  I  remain, 
faithfully  yours, 

"J.  A.  FROUDE." 

A  few  days  later  he  writes :  "I  have  seen 
Stewart  and  looked  through  the  catalogue.  There 
appear  to  be  about  eight  volumes  which  I  wish 
to  examine.  The  volumes  which  I  marked  as 
containing  matter  at  present  important  to  me  are 
Vols.  2  and  3  on  the  war  with  France  and  Scotland 
from  1559  to  1563,  Vols.  138,  152,  153,  154,  155 
on  the  disputes  relating  to  the  succession  to  the 
English  Crown,  and  the  respective  claims  of  the 
Queen  of  Scots,  Lady  Catherine  Grey,  Lord 
Darnley,  and  Lady  Margaret  Lennox.  I  noted  the 
volumes  only.  I  did  not  take  notice  of  the  pages 
because  as  far  as  I  could  see  the  volumes  appeared 
to  be  given  up  to  special  subjects,  and  I  should 
wish  therefore  to  read  them  through." 

His  growing  admiration  for  Cecil  appears  in  the 
following  extracts  : 

"  I  could  only  do  real  justice  to  such  a  collection 
by  being  allowed  to  read  through  the  whole  of 
it  volume  by  volume — and  for  such  a  large 
permission  as  that  I  fear  it  may  be  dangerous 


THE    HISTORY  119 

to  ask.  Lord  Salisbury,  however,  whatever  my 
faults  may  be,  could  find  no  one  who  has  a  more 
genuine  admiration  for  his  ancestor." 

October  i6th,  1864. — "  I  cannot  say  beforehand 
the  papers  which  I  wish  to  examine,  as  I  cannot 
tell  what  the  collection  may  contain.  My  object 
is  to  have  everything  which  admits  of  being  learnt 
about  the  period — especially  what  may  throw 
light  on  Lord  Burleigh's  character.  He,  it  is 
more  and  more  clear  to  me,  was  the  solitary  author 
of  Elizabeth's  and  England's  greatness." 

"  I  shall  return  from  Simancas,"  he  writes  from 
Valladolid,  "  more  a  Cecil  maniac  than  ever.  In 
the  Duke  of  Norfolk's  conspiracy,  the  Queen  seems 
to  have  fairly  given  up  the  reins  to  him.  It  is 
impossible  to  read  the  correspondence  between 
Philip,  Alva,  the  Pope,  the  Duke  of  Norfolk,  and 
the  Queen  of  Scots,  the  deliberate  arrangements 
for  Elizabeth's  murder,  without  shivering  to  think 
how  near  a  chance  it  was.  Cecil  was  the  one  only 
man  they  feared,  and  the  skill  with  which  he  dug 
mines  below  theirs,  and  pulled  the  strings  of  the 
whole  of  Europe  against  them,  was  truly  splendid. 
Elizabeth  had  lost  her  head  with  it  all,  but  she 
knew  it  and  did  not  interfere.  There  are  a  great 
many  letters  of  the  Queen  of  Scots  at  Simancas, 
some  of  them  of  the  deepest  interest.  She  remains 
the  same  as  I  have  always  thought  her — brilliant, 
cruel,  ruthless,  and  perfectly  unfeeling." 

Although    Froude's   admiration    for   Elizabeth 
steadily    diminished    with    the    progress    of    his 


120  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

researches,  even  students  of  his  History  will  be 
surprised  by  such  a  verdict  as  this  : 

"  I  am  slowly  drawing  to  the  end  of  my  long 
journey  through  the  Records.  By  far  the  largest 
part  of  Burghley's  papers  is  here  [in  the  Record 
Office],  and  not  at  Hatfield.  The  private  letters 
which  passed  between  him  and  Walsingham  about 
Elizabeth  have  destroyed  finally  the  prejudice 
that  still  clung  to  me  that,  notwithstanding  her 
many  faults,  she  was  a  woman  of  ability.  Evi- 
dently in  their  opinion  she  had  no  ability  at  all 
worth  calling  by  the  name." 

Two  or  three  extracts  will  complete  the  part  of 
this  correspondence  which  deals  with  the  com- 
position of  the  History.  "  I  have  been  incessantly 
busy  in  the  Record  Office  since  my  return  to 
London.  The  more  completely  I  examine  the 
MSS.  elsewhere  the  better  use  I  shall  be  able  to 
make  of  yours.  I  have  still  two  months  of  this 
kind  before  me,  and  my  intention,  if  you  did 
not  yourself  write  to  me  first,  was  to  ask  you  to 
let  me  go  to  Hatfield  for  a  week  or  two  about 
Easter." 

"  I  am  now  sufficiently  master  of  the  story 
to  be  able  to  make  very  good  (I  daresay  complete) 
use  of  the  Hatfield  papers  in  my  present  condition. 
I  feel  as  if  there  were  very  few  dark  places  left  in 
Queen  Elizabeth's  proceedings  anywhere.  I  sub- 
stantially end,  in  a  blaze  of  fireworks,  with  the 
Armada.  The  concentrated  interest  of  the  reign 
lies  in  the  period  now  under  my  hands.  It  is 


THE    HISTORY  121 

all  action,  and  I  shall  use  my  materials  badly  if 
I  cannot  make  it  as  interesting  as  a  novel." 

Nothing  was  neglected  by  Froude  which  could 
throw  light  upon  the  splendid  and  illustrious 
Queen  who  raised  England  from  the  depths  of 
degradation  to  the  height  of  renown.  It  was 
at  the  zenith  of  Elizabeth's  career  that  Froude 
stopped.  His  original  intention  had  been  to 
continue  till  her  death.  But  the  ample  scale 
on  which  he  had  planned  his  book  was  so  much 
enlarged  by  his  copious  quotations  from  the 
manuscripts  at  Simancas  that  by  the  time  he 
reached  his  eleventh  volume  he  substituted 
for  the  death  of  Elizabeth  on  his  title-page 
the  defeat  of  the  Armada.  With  the  year 
1588,  then,  he  closed  his  labours.  Even  the 
perverse  critics  who  had  assumed  to  treat  the 
History  of  Henry  VIII.  as  an  anti-ecclesiastical 
pamphlet  were  compelled  to  show  more  respect 
for  volumes  which  gave  so  much  novel  information 
to  the  world.  Moreover  Henry's  daughter  was 
a  very  different  person  from  her  father.  Scandal 
about  Queen  Elizabeth  had  been  chiefly  confined 
to  Roman  Catholics,  and  few  Englishmen  had 
forgotten  who  made  England  the  mistress  of  the 
seas.  The  old  religion  had  a  strong  fascination 
for  her,  and  every  one  knows  how  she  interrupted 
Dean  Nowell  when  he  preached  against  images. 
She  declined  to  be  the  head  of  the  Church  in  the 
sense  arrogated  by  Henry,  and  yet  she  would  by 
no  means  admit  the  supremacy  of  the  Pope.  If 


122  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

she  ever  felt  any  inclination  towards  Rome,  the 
massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew  checked  it  for  ever. 
Gregory  XIII.  and  Catherine  de  Medici  were  not 
rulers  to  her  taste.  On  the  other  hand  she 
resisted  the  persecuting  tendencies  of  her  own 
Bishops,  and  spared  the  life  even  of  such  a  wretch 
as  Bonner.  It  is  possible  that  she  believed  in 
transubstantiation.  It  is  certain  that  she  objected 
to  the  marriage  of  the  clergy,  and  showed  scant 
courtesy  to  the  wife  of  her  own  favourite  Arch- 
bishop Parker.  Nor  would  she  suffer  the  Bishops, 
except  as  Peers,  to  meddle  in  affairs  of  State.  A 
magnificent  princess,  every  inch  a  queen,  she  could 
not  forget  that  the  English  people  had  saved  her 
life  from  the  clutches  of  her  sister,  and  it  was  for 
them,  not  for  any  Minister,  courtier,  or  lover,  that 
she  really  cared. 

Froude  was  no  idolater  of  Elizabeth,  and  he 
became  more  unfavourable  to  her  as  he  proceeded. 
He  dwells  minutely  upon  all  her  intrigues,  in 
which  she  was  as  petty  as  in  great  matters  she 
was  grand.  For  her  rival,  Mary  Stuart,  he 
had  neither  respect  nor  mercy.  To  her  intellect 
indeed,  which  was  quite  on  a  par  with  Elizabeth's, 
he  does  full  justice.  But  neither  her  beauty  nor 
her  wit,  neither  her  scholarship  nor  her  statesman- 
ship, neither  her  passion  nor  her  courage,  could 
blind  him  to  her  selfishness,  her  immorality,  and 
the  fact  that  she  represented  the  Catholic  cause. 
His  account  of  her  execution  certainly  lacks  senti- 
ment, and  Mrs.  Norton  accused  him  of  writing  like 


THE    HISTORY  123 

a  disappointed  lover.  His  sympathies  are  with 
John  Knox,  and  the  Regent  Murray,  and  Mait- 
land  of  Lethington.  But  the  man  who  believes 
that  Mary  was  not  concerned  in  the  murder  of  her 
husband  will  believe  anything,  even  that  she  did 
not  reward  the  murderer  of  her  brother,  or  that 
she  would  have  spared  Elizabeth  if  Elizabeth 
had  been  in  her  power.  And  at  least  Froude 
does  not,  like  some  more  modern  writers,  degrade 
her  to  the  level  of  a  kitchen  wench.  Froude' s 
Elizabeth  was  the  subject  of  bitter,  hostile,  some- 
times violent,  criticism  in  The  Saturday  Review, 
the  property  of  an  ardent  High  Churchman, 
Beresford  Hope.  In  the  next  chapter  I  shall 
deal  with  these  articles  at  more  length.  It  is 
enough  to  say  here  that  they  were  directed  not 
merely  at  Froude' s  accuracy  as  an  historian,  but 
at  his  truthfulness  as  a  man,  suggesting  that  the 
mode  in  which  he  had  manipulated  authorities 
accessible  to  every  one  threw  grave  doubts 
upon  his  version  of  what  he  read  at  Simancas. 
Froude  knew  very  well  that  he  should  make 
enemies.  His  belief  that  history  had  been  cleri- 
calised,  and  required  to  be  laicised,  was  regarded 
as  peculiarly  offensive  in  one  who  had  been 
himself  ordained. 

Mary  Stuart,  moreover,  had  stalwart  champions 
beyond  the  border  who  were  neither  clerical  nor 
ecclesiastical.  "I  fear,"  Froude  wrote  on  the  22nd 
of  May,  1862,  to  his  Scottish  friend  Skelton,  who 
was  himself  much  interested  in  the  subject — "  I 


124  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

fear  my  book  will  bring  all  your  people  about 
my  ears.  Mary  Stuart,  from  my  point  of  view, 
was  something  between  Rachel  and  a  pantheress." 
The  success  of  the  History  had  been  long  since 
assured,  and  each  successive  pair  of  volumes  met 
with  a  cordial  welcome.  Many  people  disagreed 
with  Froude  on  many  points.  He  expected  dis- 
agreement, and  did  not  mind  it.  But  no  one 
could  fail  to  see  the  evidence  of  patient,  thorough 
research  which  every  chapter,  almost  every  page, 
contains.  Indeed,  it  might  be  said  with  justice, 
or  at  least  with  some  plausibility,  that  the  long 
and  frequent  extracts  from  the  despatches  of 
De  Feria,  de  Quadra,  de  Silva,  and  Don  Guereau, 
successively  Ambassadors  from  Philip  to  Eliza- 
beth, water-log  the  book,  and  make  it  too  like  a 
series  of  extracts  with  explanatory  comments. 
Of  Froude's  own  style  there  could  not  be  two 
opinions.  His  bitterest  antagonists  were  forced 
to  admit  that  it  was  the  perfection  of  easy,  grace- 
ful narrative,  without  the  majestic  splendour  of 
Gibbon,  but  also  without  the  mechanical  hardness 
of  Macaulay.  Froude  did  not  stop  deliberately, 
as  other  historians  have  stopped,  to  paint  pictures 
or  draw  portraits,  and  there  are  few  writers  from 
whom  it  is  more  difficult  to  make  typical  or 
characteristic  extracts.  Yet,  as  I  have  already 
quoted  from  his  account  of  Cranmer's  execution, 
it  may  not  be  inappropriate  that  I  should  cite 
some  of  the  thoughts  suggested  to  him  by  the 
death  of  Knox.  Morton's  epitaph  is  well  known. 


THE    HISTORY  123 

'  There  lies  one,"  said  the  Earl  over  the  coffin, 
"  who  never  feared  the  face  of  mortal  man." 
"  Morton,"  says  Froude,  "  spoke  only  of  what  he 
knew ;  the  full  measure  of  Knox's  greatness 
neither  he  nor  any  man  could  then  estimate.  It 
is  as  we  look  back  over  that  stormy  time,  and 
weigh  the  actors  in  it  one  against  the  other,  that 
he  stands  out  in  his  full  proportions.  No  grander 
figure  can  be  found,  in  the  entire  history  of  the 
Reformation  in  this  island,  than  that  of  Knox. 
Cromwell  and  Burghley  rank  beside  him  for  the 
work  which  they  effected,  but,  as  politicians  and 
statesmen,  they  had  to  labour  with  instruments 
which  soiled  their  hands  in  touching  them.  In 
purity,  in  uprightness,  in  courage,  truth  and 
stainless  honour,  the  Regent  and  Latimer  were 
perhaps  his  equals  ;  but  Murray  was  intellectually 
far  below  him  and  the  sphere  of  Latimer' s  influence 
was  on  a  smaller  scale.  The  time  has  come  when 
English  history  may  do  justice  to  one  but  for 
whom  the  Reformation  would  have  been  over- 
thrown among  ourselves  ;  for  the  spirit  which 
Knox  created  saved  Scotland  ;  and  if  Scotland 
had  been  Catholic  again,  neither  the  wisdom  of 
Elizabeth's  Ministers,  nor  the  teaching  of  her 
Bishops,  nor  her  own  chicaneries,  would  have 
preserved  England  from  revolution.  His  was  the 
voice  that  taught  the  peasant  of  the  Lothians 
that  he  was  a  free  man,  the  equal  in  the  sight 
of  God  with  the  proudest  peer  or  prelate  that  had 
trampled  on  his  forefathers.  He  was  the  one 


126  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

antagonist  whom  Mary  Stuart  could  not  soften 
nor  Maitland  deceive.  He  it  was  who  had  raised 
the  poor  commons  of  his  country  into  a  stern 
and  rugged  people,  who  might  be  hard,  narrow, 
superstitious  and  fanatical,  but  who  nevertheless 
were  men  whom  neither  king,  noble,  nor  priest 
could  force  again  to  submit  to  tyranny.  And 
his  reward  has  been  the  ingratitude  of  those  who 
should  have  done  most  honour  to  his  memory." 

The  spirit  of  this  fine  passage  may  be  due  to  the 
great  Scotsman  with  whom  Froude' s  name  will 
always  be  inseparably  associated.  But  Froude 
knew  the  subject  as  Carlyle  did  not  pretend  to 
know  it,  and  his  verdict  is  as  authoritative  as  it 
is  just.  It  is  knowledge,  even  more  than  brilliancy, 
that  these  twelve  volumes  evince.  Froude  had 
mastered  the  sixteenth  century  as  Macaulay 
mastered  the  seventeenth,  with  the  same  minute, 
patient  industry.  When  he  came  to  write  he 
wrote  with  such  apparent  facility  that  those  who 
did  not  know  the  meaning  of  historical  research 
thought  him  shallow  and  superficial. 

The  period  during  which  Froude  was  studying 
the  reign  of  Elizabeth  must  be  pronounced  the 
happiest  of  his  life.  He  was  a  born  historian, 
and  loved  research.  He  had  opportunities  of 
acquiring  knowledge  opened  to  no  one  before,  and 
it  concerned  those  events  which  above  all  others 
attracted  him.  His  second  wife  was  the  most 
sympathetic  of  companions,  thoroughly  under- 
standing all  his  moods.  She  was  fond  of  society, 


THE    HISTORY  127 

and  induced  him  to  frequent  it.  Froude  was 
disinclined  to  go  out  in  the  evening,  and  would, 
if  he  had  been  left  to  himself,  have  stayed  at  home. 
He  wrote  to  Lady  Salisbury :  "I  must  trust  to 
your  kindness  to  make  allowance  for  my  old- 
fashioned  ways.  I  am  so  much  engaged  in  the 
week  that  I  give  my  Sunday  evenings  to  my 
children,  and  never  go  out."  But  when  he  was  in 
company  he  talked  better  than  almost  any  one 
else,  and  he  had  a  magnetic  power  of  fascination 
which  men  as  well  as  women  often  found  quite 
irresistible.  Living  in  London,  he  saw  people  of 
all  sorts,  and  the  puritan  sternness  which  lay  at 
the  root  of  his  character  was  concealed  by  the 
cynical  humour  which  gave  zest  to  his  conversation. 
He  had  not  forgotten  his  native  county,  and  in 
1863  he  took  a  house  at  Salcombe  on  the 
southern  coast  of  Devonshire.  Ringrone,  which 
he  rented  from  Lord  Kingsale,  is  a  beautiful 
spot,  now  a  hotel,  then  remote  from  railways, 
and  an  ideal  refuge  for  a  student.  "  We  have  a 
sea  like  the  Mediterranean,"  he  tells  Skelton, 
"  and  estuaries  beautiful  as  Loch  Fyne,  the  green 
water  washing  our  garden  wall,  and  boats  and 
mackerel."  Froude  worked  there,  however,  be- 
sides yachting,  fishing,  and  shooting. 

In  1864,  for  instance,  he  "  floundered  all  the 
summer  among  the  extinct  mine-shafts  of  Scotch 
politics — the  most  damnable  set  of  pitfalls  mortal 
man  was  ever  set  to  blunder  through  in  the 
dark."  His  study  opened  on  the  garden,  from 


128  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

which  the  sea-view  is  one  of  the  finest  in  Eng- 
land. Froude  loved  Devonshire  folk,  and  enjoyed 
talking  to  them  in  their  own  dialect,  or  smoking 
with  them  on  the  shore.  He  was  particularly 
fond  of  the  indignant  expostulation  of  a  poor 
woman  whose  husband  had  been  injured  by  his 
own  chopper,  and  obliged  in  consequence  to  keep 
his  bed.  If,  she  said,  it  had  been  "  a  visitation 
of  Providence,  or  the  like  of  that  there,"  he  would 
have  borne  it  patiently.  "  But  to  come  upon  a 
man  in  the  wood-house  "  was  not  in  the  fitness  of 
things.  Froude' s  favourite  places  of  worship  in 
London  were  Westminster  Abbey  during  Dean 
Stanley's  time,  and  afterwards  the  Temple  Church, 
as  may  be  gathered  from  his  Short  Study  on  the 
Templars.  In  Devonshire  he  frequented  an  old- 
fashioned  church  where  stringed  instruments  were 
still  played,  and  was  much  delighted  with  the 
remark  of  a  fiddler  which  he  overheard.  '  Who 
is  the  King  of  glory  ? "  had  been  given  out 
as  the  anthem.  While  the  fiddles  were  tuning  up 
a  voice  was  heard  to  say :  "  Hand  us  up  the 
rosin,  Tom ;  us'll  soon  tell  them  who's  the  King 
of  glory." 

As  an  editor  Froude  was  tolerant  and 
catholic.  "  On  controverted  points,"  he  said, 
"  I  approve  myself  of  the  practice  of  the 
Reformation.  When  St.  Paul's  Cross  pulpit 
was  occupied  one  Sunday  by  a  Lutheran,  the 
next  by  a  Catholic,  the  next  by  a  Calvinist,  all 
sides  had  a  hearing,  and  the  preachers  knew 


THE    HISTORY  129 

that  they  would  be  pulled  up  before  the  same 
audience  for  what  they  might  say."  His  own 
literary  judgments  were  rather  conventional. 
The  mixture  of  classes  in  Clough's  Bothie  dis- 
turbed him.  The  genius  of  Matthew  Arnold  he 
had  recognised  at  once,  but  then  Arnold  was 
a  classical,  academic  poet.  About  Tennyson  he 
agreed  with  the  rest  of  the  world,  while  Tenny- 
son, who  was  a  personal  friend,  paid  him  the 
great  compliment  of  taking  from  him  the  subject 
of  a  poem  and  the  material  of  a  play.  His 
prejudice  against  Browning's  style,  much  as  he 
liked  Browning  himself,  was  hard  to  overcome, 
and  on  this  point  he  had  a  serious  difference 
with  his  friend  Skelton.  "  Browning's  verse  !  " 
he  exclaims.  "  With  intellect,  thought,  power, 
grace,  all  the  charms  in  detail  which  poetry 
should  have,  it  rings  after  all  like  a  bell  of 
lead."  This  was  in  1863,  when  Browning  had 
published  Men  and  Women,  and  Dramatic  Lyrics. 
However,  he  admitted  Skelton' s  article  on  the 
other  side,  and  added,  with  magnificent  candour, 
that  "  to  this  generation  Browning's  poetry  is  as 
uninteresting  as  Shakespeare's  Sonnets  were  to 
the  last  century."  The  most  fervent  Browningite 
could  have  said  no  more  than  that.  To  Mr. 
Swinburne's  Poems  and  Ballads  Froude  was  con- 
spicuously fair.  There  was  much  in  them  which 
offended  his  Puritanism,  but  he  was  disgusted 
with  the  virulence  of  the  critics,  and  he  allowed 
Skelton  to  write  in  Fraser  a  qualified  apology. 

Q, 


130  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

'  The  Saturday  Review  temperament,"  he  wrote, 
"  is  ten  thousand  thousand  times  more  damnable 
than  the  worst  of  Swinburne's  skits.  Modern  re- 
spectability is  so  utterly  without  God,  faith,  heart ; 
it  shows  so  singular  an  ingenuity  in  assailing 
and  injuring  everything  that  is  noble  and  good, 
and  so  systematic  a  preference  for  what  is  mean 
and  paltry,  that  I  am  not  surprised  at  a  young 
fellow  dashing  his  heels  into  the  face  of  it.  .  .  . 
When  there  is  any  kind  of  true  genius,  we  have 
no  right  to  drive  it  mad.  We  must  deal  with 
it  wisely,  justly,  fairly."  l 

Froude  was  an  excellent  editor  ;  appreciative, 
discriminating,  and  alert.  He  prided  himself  on 
Carlyle's  approval,  though  perhaps  Carlyle  was 
not  the  best  judge  of  such  things.  His  energy 
was  multifarious.  Besides  his  History  and  his 
magazine,  he  found  time  for  a  stray  lecture  at 
odd  times,  and  he  could  always  reckon  upon 
a  good  audience.  His  discourse  at  the  Royal 
Institution  in  February,  1864,  on  "  The  Science  of 
History,"  for  which  he  was  "  called  an  atheist," 
is  in  the  main  a  criticism  of  Buckle,  the  one 
really  scientific  historian.  According  to  Buckle, 
the  history  of  mankind  was  a  natural  growth, 
and  it  was  only  inadequate  knowledge  of  the  past 
that  made  the  impossibility  of  predicting  the 
future.  Great  men  were  like  small  men,  obeying 
the  same  natural  laws,  though  a  trifle  more 
erratic  in  their  behaviour.  Political  economy  was 

1  Table  Talk  of  Shirley,  p.   137. 


THE    HISTORY  131 

history  in  little,  illustrating  the  regularity  of 
human,  like  all  other  natural,  forces.  But  can 
we  predict  historical  events,  as  we  can  predict 
an  eclipse  ?  That  is  Froude's  answer  to  Buckle, 
in  the  form  of  a  question. 

"  Gibbon  believed  that  the  era  of  conquerors 
was  at  an  end.  Had  he  lived  out  the  full  life  of 
man,  he  would  have  seen  Europe  at  the  feet  of 
Napoleon.  But  a  few  years  ago  we  believed  the 
world  had  grown  too  civilised  for  war,  and  the 
Crystal  Palace  in  Hyde  Park  was  to  be  the  inaugura- 
tion of  a  new  era.  Battles,  bloody  as  Napoleon's, 
are  now  the  familiar  tale  of  every  day  ;  and  the 
arts  which  have  made  the  greatest  progress  are 
the  arts  of  destruction."  It  is  difficult  to  see  the 
atheism  in  all  this,  but  the  common  sense  is  plain 
enough.  Froude  belonged  to  the  school  of  literary 
historians,  such  as  were  Thucydides  and  Tacitus, 
Gibbon  and  Finlay,  not  to  the  school  of  Buckle, 
or,  as  we  should  now  say,  of  Professor  Bury. 

In  1865  Froude  removed  from  Clifton  Place, 
Hyde  Park,  to  Onslow  Gardens  in  South  Kensing- 
ton, where  he  lived  for  the  next  quarter  of  a 
century.  In  1868  the  students  of  St.  Andrews 
chose  him  to  be  Lord  Rector  of  the  University, 
and  on  the  23rd  of  March,  1869,  he  delivered 
his  Inaugural  Address  on  Education,  which 
compared  the  plain  living  and  high  thinking 
of  the  Scottish  Universities  with  the  expen- 
sive and  luxurious  idleness  that  he  remembered 
at  Oxford.  Froude  was  delighted  with  the 


132  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

compliment  the  students  had  paid  him,  and  they 
were  equally  charmed  with  their  Rector.  In  fact, 
his  visit  to  St.  Andrews  produced  in  1869  a  sugges- 
tion that  he  should  become  the  Parliamentary 
representative  of  that  University  and  of  Edin- 
burgh. But  the  injustice  of  the  law  as  it  then 
stood  disqualified  him  as  a  candidate.  His 
deacon's  orders,  the  shadowy  remnant  of  a  mis- 
taken choice,  stood  in  his  way.  Next  year,  in 
1870,  Bouverie's  Act  passed,  and  Froude  was  one 
of  the  first  to  take  advantage  of  it  by  becoming 
again,  what  he  had  really  never  ceased  to  be,  a 
layman.  As  he  did  not  enter  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, it  is  idle  to  speculate  on  what  might  have 
been  his  political  career.  Probably  it  would  have 
been  undistinguished.  He  was  not  a  good  speaker, 
and  he  was  a  bad  party  man.  His  butler,  who  had 
been  long  with  him,  and  knew  him  well,  was  once 
asked  by  a  canvassing  agent  what  his  master's 
politics  were.  '  Well,"  he  said  reflectively,  "  when 
the  Liberals  are  in,  Mr.  Froude  is  sometimes  a 
Conservative.  When  the  Conservatives  are  in, 
Mr.  Froude  is  always  a  Liberal."  His  own  master, 
Carlyle,  had  been  in  early  life  an  ardent  reformer, 
and  had  hoped  great  things  from  the  Act  of  1832. 
Perhaps  he  did  not  know  very  clearly  what  he 
expected.  At  any  rate  he  was  disappointed,  and, 
though  he  wrote  an  enthusiastic  letter  to  Peel  after 
the  abolition  of  the  Corn  Laws,  he  regarded  the 
Reform  Act  of  1867  with  indignant  disgust. 
Froude  had  a  fitful  and  uncertain  admiration 


THE    HISTORY  133 

for  Disraeli.  Gladstone  he  never  liked  or  trusted, 
and  did  not  take  the  trouble  to  understand.  He 
had  been  brought  up  to  despise  oratory,  he  had 
caught  from  Carlyle  a  horror  of  democracy,  he 
disliked  the  Anglo-Catholic  party  in  the  Church 
of  England,  and  Gladstone's  financial  genius  was 
out  of  his  line.  The  Liberal  Government  of  1868 
was  in  his  opinion  criminally  indifferent  to  the 
Colonies.  An  earnest  advocate  of  Federation,  he 
did  not  see  that  the  best  way  of  retaining  colonial 
loyalty  was  to  preserve  colonial  independence 
intact.  Nevertheless  Froude  was  a  pioneer  of 
the  modern  movement,  still  in  progress,  for  a 
closer  union  with  the  scattered  parts  of  the  British 
Empire.  He  feared  that  the  Colonies  would  go 
if  some  effort  were  not  made  to  retain  them,  and 
he  turned  over  in  his  mind  the  various  means  of 
building  up  a  federal  system.  Although  Canadian 
Federation  was  emphatically  Canadian  in  its  origin, 
and  had  been  adopted  in  principle  by  Cardwell 
during  the  Government  of  Lord  Russell,  it  was 
Lord  Carnarvon  who  carried  it  out,  and  he  had 
no  warmer  supporter  than  Froude. 

Of  Froude' s  favourite  recreations  at  this  time 
the  best  account  is  to  be  found  in  his  two  Short 
Studies  on  A  Fortnight  in  Kerry.  From  1868  to 
1870  he  rented  from  Lord  Lansdowne  a  place 
called  Derreen,  thirty-six  miles  from  Killarney,  and 
seventeen  from  Kenmare,  where  he  spent  the  best 
part  of  the  summer  and  autumn.  If  Froude  did 
not  altogether  understand  the  Irish  people,  at 


134  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

least  the  Irish  Catholics,  and  had  no  sympathy 
with  their  political  aspirations,  he  loved  their 
humour,  and  the  scenery  of  "  the  most  beautiful 
island  in  the  world  "  had  been  familiar  to  him  from 
his  early  manhood.  In  one  of  his  youthful  rambles 
he  had  been  struck  down  by  small-pox,  and  nursed 
with  a  devotion  which  he  never  forgot.1  Yet 
between  him  and  the  Celt,  as  between  him  and 
the  Catholic,  there  was  a  mysterious,  impassable 
barrier.  They  had  not  the  same  fundamental 
ideas  of  right  and  wrong.  They  did  not  in  very 
truth  worship  the  same  God.  But  of  Froude  and 
the  Irish  I  shall  have  to  speak  more  at  length 
hereafter.  In  Kerry  he  enjoyed  himself,  while  at 
the  same  time  he  finished  his  History  of  England, 
and  his  description  of  the  country  is  enchanting. 

"  A  glance  out  of  the  window  in  the  morning 
showed  that  I  had  not  overrated  the  general  charm 
of  the  situation.  The  colours  were  unlike  those  of 
any  mountain  scenery  to  which  I  was  accustomed 
elsewhere.  The  temperature  is  many  degrees 
higher  than  that  of  the  Scotch  highlands.  The 
Gulf  Stream  impinges  full  upon  the  mouths  of  its 
long  bays.  Every  tide  carries  the  flood  of  warm 
water  forty  miles  inland,  and  the  vegetation  con- 
sequently is  rarely  or  never  checked  by  frost  even 
two  thousand  feet  above  the  sea-level.  Thus  the 
mountains  have  a  greenness  altogether  peculiar, 
stretches  of  grass  as  rich  as  water-meadows 
reaching  between  the  crags  and  precipices  to  the 

1  See  p.  35. 


THE    HISTORY  135 

very  summits.  The  rock,  chiefly  old  red  sand- 
stone, is  purple.  The  heather,  of  which  there  are 
enormous  masses,  is  in  many  places  waist  deep." 
Yachting  and  fishing,  fishing  and  yachting,  were 
the  staple  amusements  at  Derreen.  Nothing  was 
more  characteristic  of  Froude  than  his  love  of  the 
sea  and  the  open  air.  Sport,  in  the  proper  sense 
of  the  term,  he  also  loved.  "  I  always  consider," 
he  said,  "  that  the  proudest  moment  of  my  life  was, 
when  sliding  down  a  shale  heap,  I  got  a  right  and 
left  at  woodcocks."  For  luxurious  modes  of  making 
big  bags  with  little  trouble  he  never  cared  at  all. 
But  let  him  once  more  explain  himself  in  his  own 
words.  "  I  delight  in  a  mountain  walk  when  I  must 
work  hard  for  my  five  brace  of  grouse.  I  see  no 
amusement  in  dawdling  over  a  lowland  moor  where 
the  packs  are  as  thick  as  chickens  in  a  poultry-yard. 
I  like  better  than  most  things  a  day  with  my  own 
dogs  in  scattered  covers,  when  I  know  not  what 
may  rise — a  woodcock,  an  odd  pheasant,  a  snipe 
in  the  out-lying  willow-bed,  and  perhaps  a  mallard 
or  a  teal.  A  hare  or  two  falls  in  agreeably  when 
the  mistress  of  the  house  takes  an  interest  in  the 
bag.  I  detest  battues  and  hot  corners,  and 
slaughter  for  slaughter's  sake.  I  wish  every 
tenant  in  England  had  his  share  in  amusements 
which  in  moderation  are  good  for  us  all,  and  was 
allowed  to  shoot  such  birds  or  beasts  as  were  bred 
on  his  own  farm,  any  clause  in  his  lease  to  the 
contrary  notwithstanding."  Considering  that  this 
passage  was  written  ten  years  before  the  Ground 


136  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

Game  Act,  it  must  be  admitted  that  the  sentiment 
is  remarkably  liberal.  The  chief  interest  of  these 
papers,1  however,  is  not  political,  but  personal. 
They  show  what  Froude's  natural  tastes  were,  the 
tastes  of  a  sportsman  and  a  country  gentleman. 
He  had  long  outgrown  the  weakness  of  his  boyhood, 
and  his  physical  health  was  robust.  With  a  firm 
foot  and  a  strong  head  he  walked  freely  over 
cliffs  where  a  false  step  would  have  meant  a  fall 
of  a  thousand  feet.  No  man  of  letters  was  ever 
more  devoted  to  exercise  and  sport.  Though 
subject,  like  most  men,  and  all  editors,  to  fits  of 
despondency,  he  had  a  sound  mind  in  a  healthy 
frame,  and  his  pessimism  was  purely  theoretical. 

Froude's  History,  the  great  work  of  his  life,  was 
completed  in  1870.  He  deliberately  chose,  after  the 
twelve  volumes,  to  leave  Elizabeth  at  the  height 
of  her  power,  mistress  of  the  seas,  with  Spain 
crushed  at  her  feet.  As  he  says  himself,  in  the 
opening  paragraph  of  his  own  Conclusion,  "  Chess- 
players, when  they  have  brought  their  game  to  a 
point  at  which  the  result  can  be  foreseen  with  cer- 
tainty, regard  their  contest  as  ended,  and  sweep  the 
pieces  from  the  board."  Froude  had  accomplished 
his  purpose.  He  had  rewritten  the  story  of  the 
Reformation.  He  had  proved  that  the  Church  of 
England,  though  in  a  sense  it  dated  from  St. 
Austin  of  Canterbury,  became  under  Henry  VIII. 
a  self-contained  institution,  independent  of  Rome 
and  subject  to  the  supremacy  of  the  Crown. 

1  Short  Studies,  vol.  ii.  pp.  217-308. 


THE    HISTORY  137 

Elizabeth  altered  the  form  of  words  in  which  her 
father  had  expressed  his  ecclesiastical  authority ; 
but  the  substance  was  in  both  cases  the  same. 
The  sovereign  was  everything.  The  Bishop  of 
Rome  was  nothing.  There  has  never  been  in  the 
Church  of  England  since  the  divorce  of  Katharine 
any  power  to  make  a  Bishop  without  the  authority 
of  the  Crown,  or  to  change  a  doctrine  without  the 
authority  of  Parliament,  nor  has  any  layman  been 
legally  subject  to  temporal  punishment  by  the 
ecclesiastical  courts.  Convocation  cannot  touch 
an  article  or  a  formulary.  King,  Lords,  and 
Commons  can  make  new  formularies  or  abolish 
the  old.  The  laity  owe  no  allegiance  to  the 
Canons,  and  in  every  theological  suit  the  final 
appeal  is  to  the  King  in  Council,  now  the  Judicial 
Committee.  Since  the  accession  of  Elizabeth 
divine  service  has  been  performed  in  English,  and 
the  English  Bible  has  been  open  to  every  one  who 
can  read.  Yet  there  are  people  who  talk  as  if 
the  Reformation  meant  nothing,  was  nothing, 
never  occurred  at  all.  This  theory,  like  the 
shallow  sentimentalism  which  made  an  innocent 
saint  and  martyr  of  Mary  Stuart,  has  never  re- 
covered from  the  crushing  onslaught  of  Froude. 

Mr.  Swinburne  in  the  Encyclopedia  Britannica 
reduces  the  latter  theory  to  an  absurdity  by  de- 
monstrating that  if  Mary  was  innocent  she  was 
a  fool.  In  his  defence  of  Elizabeth  Froude  stops 
short  of  many  admirers.  He  was  disgusted  by 
her  feminine  weakness  for  masculine  flattery ;  he 


138  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

dwells  with  almost  tedious  minuteness  upon  her 
smallest  intrigues  ;  he  exposes  her  parsimonious 
ingratitude  to  her  dauntless  and  unrivalled  seamen. 
Yet  for  all  that  he  brings  out  the  vital  difference 
between  her  and  Mary  Tudor,  between  the  Pro- 
testant and  Catholic  systems  of  government. 
Elizabeth  boasted,  and  boasted  truly,  that  she 
did  not  persecute  opinion.  If  people  were  good 
citizens  and  loyal  subjects,  it  was  all  the  same 
to  her  whether  they  went  to  church  or  to  mass. 
Had  it  been  possible  to  adopt  and  apply  in  the 
sixteenth  century  the  modern  doctrine  of  con- 
temptuous indifference  to  sectarian  quarrels,  there 
was  not  one  of  her  subjects  more  capable  of  appre- 
ciating and  acting  upon  it  than  the  great  Queen 
herself.  But  in  that  case  she  would  have  estranged 
her  friends  without  conciliating  her  opponents. 
She  would  have  forfeited  her  throne  and  her  life. 
Pius  V.  had  not  merely  excommunicated  her, 
which  was  a  barren  and  ineffective  threat,  a  telum 
imbelle  sine  ictu ;  he  had  also  purported  to  depose 
her  as  a  heretic,  and  to  release  her  subjects  from 
the  duty  of  allegiance.  Another  Vicar  of  Christ, 
Gregory  XIII. ,  went  farther.  He  intimated,  not 
obscurely,  that  whosoever  removed  such  a  monster 
from  the  world  would  be  doing  God's  service. 
This  at  least  was  no  idle  menace.  Those  great 
leaders  of  Protestantism  in  Europe,  Coligny, 
Murray,  William  the  Silent,  were  successively 
murdered  within  a  few  years.  That  was,  as  Fra 
Paolo  said  when  he  saw  the  dagger  (stilus)  which 


THE    HISTORY  139 

had  wounded  him,  the  style  (stylus)  of  the  Roman 
Court.  It  is  all  very  well  to  say  that  Gregory  was 
a  blasphemous,  murderous  old  bigot,  and  might 
have  been  left  to  the  God  of  justice  and  mercy, 
who  would  deal  with  him  in  His  own  good  time. 
Before  that  time  came,  Elizabeth  might  have  been 
in  her  grave,  Mary  Stuart  might  have  been  on 
the  English  throne,  and  the  liberties  of  England 
might  have  been  as  the  liberties  of  Spain. 

Elizabeth  never  felt  personal  fear.  But  she 
was  not  a  private  individual.  She  was  an 
English  sovereign,  and  the  keynote  of  all  her 
subtle,  intricate,  tortuous  policy  was  the  resolute 
determination,  from  which  she  never  flinched, 
that  England  should  be  independent,  spiritually  as 
well  as  politically  independent,  of  a  foreign  yoke. 
Her  connection  with  the  Protestants  was  political, 
not  theological,  for  doctrinally  she  was  farther 
from  Geneva  than  from  Rome.  Her  own  Bishops 
she  despised,  not  unjustly,  as  time-servers,  calling 
them  "  doctors,"  not  prelates.  Although  she  did 
not  really  believe  that  any  human  person,  or 
any  human  formula,  was  required  between  the 
Almighty  and  His  creatures,  she  preferred  the 
mass  and  the  breviary  to  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer.  The  Inquisition  was  the  one  part  of  the 
Catholic  system  which  she  really  abhorred.  For 
the  first  twenty  years  of  her  reign  mass  was 
celebrated  in  private  houses  with  impunity, 
though  to  celebrate  it  was  against  the  law.  No 
part  of  her  policy  is  more  odious  to  modern 


140  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

notions  of  tolerance  and  enlightenment  than  pro- 
hibition of  the  mass.     Nothing  shows  more  clearly 
the  importance  of  understanding  the  mental  atmo- 
sphere of  a  past  age  before  we  attempt  to  judge 
those   who    lived   in  it.     Even  Oliver  Cromwell, 
fifty  years  after  Elizabeth's  death,  declared  that 
he  would  not  tolerate  the  mass,  and  in  general 
principles  of  religious  freedom  he  was  far  ahead 
of  his  age.     Cromwell  no  doubt,  unlike  Elizabeth, 
was  a  Protestant  in  the  religious  sense.     But  that 
was  not  his  reason.     The  mass  to  him,  and  still 
more    to    Elizabeth,   was   a   definite   symbol   of 
political  disaffection.     It  was  a  rallying  point  for 
those  who  held  that  a  heretical  sovereign  had  no 
right  to  reign,   and  might  lawfully  be  deposed, 
if  not  worse.     Between  the  Catholics  of  our  day 
and  the  Catholics  of  Elizabeth's  time  there  is  a 
great  gulf  fixed.     What  has  fixed  it  is  a  question 
too  complex  to  be  discussed  in  this  place.     Catho- 
lics still  revere  the  memory  of  Carlo  Borromeo, 
Cardinal    Archbishop    of    Milan,    who    gave    his 
blessing  to  Campian  and  Parsons  on  their  way 
to   stir  up    rebellion  in  England,  as  well  as  in 
Ireland,  and  to  assassinate  Elizabeth   if   oppor- 
tunity  should   serve.     God    said,     '  Thou    shalt 
do  no   murder."    The    Pope,   however,   thought 
that  God  had  spoken  too  broadly,  and  that  some 
qualification  was  required.     The  sixth  command- 
ment could  not  have  been  intended  for  the  protec- 
tion of  heretics  ;  and  the  Jesuits,  if  they  did  not 
inspire,  at  least  believed  him.   Campian  is  regarded 


THE    HISTORY  141 

by  thousands  of  good  men  and  women,  who  would 
not  hurt  a  fly,  as  a  martyr  to  the  faith,  and  to 
the  faith  as  he  conceived  it  he  was  a  martyr.  He 
endured  torture  and  death  without  flinching 
rather  than  acknowledge  that  Elizabeth  was 
lawful  sovereign  over  the  whole  English  realm. 
His  courage  was  splendid.  There  never,  for  the 
matter  of  that,  was  a  braver  man  than  Guy  Fawkes. 
But  when  Campian  pretended  that  his  mission 
to  England  was  purely  religious  he  was  tampering 
with  words  in  order  to  deceive.  To  him  the 
removal  of  Elizabeth  would  have  been  a  religious 
act.  The  Queen  did  all  she  could  to  make  him 
save  his  life  by  recantation,  even  applying  the 
cruel  and  lawless  machinery  of  the  rack.  If  his 
errand  had  been  merely  to  preach  what  he  regarded 
as  Catholic  truth,  she  would  have  let  him  go, 
as  she  checked  the  persecuting  tendencies  of  her 
Bishops  over  and  over  again.  But  it  was  as  much 
her  duty  to  defend  England  from  the  invasion  of 
the  Jesuits  as  to  defend  her  from  the  invasion 
of  the  Spanish  Armada.  Both  indeed  were  parts 
of  one  and  the  same  enterprise,  the  forcible 
reduction  of  England  to  dependence  upon  the 
Catholic  powers.  Although  in  God's  good  provi- 
dence it  was  foiled,  it  very  nearly  succeeded  ;  and 
if  Elizabeth  had  not  removed  Campian,  Campian 
might,  as  Babington  certainly  would,  have  removed 
her. 

The  Pope  had  been  directly  concerned  in  the 
massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew,  and  his  great  ally, 


142  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

Philip  II.,  is  said  to  have  laughed  for  the  first 
time  when  he  heard  of  it.  More  than  a  hundred 
years  afterwards  the  pious  Bossuet  thanked  God 
for  the  frightful  slaughter  of  the  Huguenots 
which  followed  the  revocation  of  the  Edict 
of  Nantes.  While  Mary  Tudor  burnt  poor 
and  humble  persons  who  could  be  no  possible 
danger  to  the  State  because  they  would  not 
renounce  the  only  form  of  Christian  faith 
they  had  ever  known,  Elizabeth  executed  for 
treason  powerful  and  influential  men  sent  by 
the  Pope  to  kill  her.  When,  after  many  long 
years,  she  reluctantly  consented  to  Mary  Stuart's 
death  on  the  scaffold,  Mary  had  been  implicated 
in  a  plot  to  take  her  life  and  succeed  her  as 
queen.  Mary  would  have  made  much  shorter 
work  of  her.  If  that  is  called  persecution,  the 
word  ceases  to  have  any  meaning. 

Froude  quotes  with  approval,  as  well  he  might, 
the  words  of  Campian's  admiring  biographer 
Richard  Simpson,  himself  a  Catholic,  a  most 
learned  and  accomplished  man.  "  The  eternal 
truths  of  Catholicism  were  made  the  vehicle  for 
opinions  about  the  authority  of  the  Holy  See 
which  could  not  be  held  by  Englishmen  loyal  to 
the  Government ;  and  true  patriotism  united  to 
a  false  religion  overcame  the  true  religion  wedded 
to  opinions  that  were  unpatriotic  in  regard  to 
the  liberties  of  Englishmen,  and  treasonable  to 
the  English  Government."  In  those  days  there 
was  only  one  kind  of  English  Government  pos- 


THE    HISTORY  143 

sible ;  the  Government  of  Elizabeth,  Burghley, 
and  Walsingham.  Parliamentary  Government 
did  not  exist.  Even  the  right  of  free  speech 
in  the  House  of  Commons  was  never  recognised 
by  the  Queen.  If  the  English  Government  had 
fallen,  England  would  have  been  at  the  mercy 
of  a  Papal  legate."  Protestantism  was  synony- 
mous with  patriotism,  and  good  Catholics  could 
not  be  good  Englishmen  while  there  was  a 
heretical  sovereign  on  the  throne.  After  the 
Armada  things  were  different.  Spain  was  crushed. 
Sixtus  V.  was  not  a  man  to  waste  money,  which 
he  loved,  in  support  of  a  losing  cause.  What 
Froude  wrote  to  establish,  and  succeeded  in 
establishing,  was  that  between  1529  and  1588  the 
Reformation  saved  England  from  the  tyranny 
of  Rome  and  the  proud  foot  of  a  Spanish 
conqueror. 

The  true  hero  of  Froude's  History  is  not  Henry 
VIII. ,  but  Cecil,  the  firm,  incorruptible,  sagacious 
Minister  who  saved  Elizabeth's  throne,  and  made 
England  the  leading  anti-Catholic  country.  Of  a 
greater  man  than  Cecil,  John  Knox,  he  was  how- 
ever almost  an  idolater.  He  considered  that  Knox 
surpassed  in  worldly  wisdom  even  Maitland  of 
Lethington,  who  was  certainly  not  hampered  by 
theological  prejudice.  With  Puritanism  itself  he 
had  much  natural  affinity,  and  as  a  determinist 
the  philosophical  side  of  Calvinism  attracted 
him  as  strongly  as  it  attracted  Jonathan  Edwards. 
Froude  combined,  perhaps  illogically,  a  belief 


144  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

in  predestination  with  a  deep  sense  of  moral 
duty  and  the  responsibility  of  man.  Every 
reader  of  his  History  must  have  been  struck  by 
his  respect  for  all  the  manly  virtues,  even  in 
those  with  whom  he  has  otherwise  no  sympathy, 
and  his  corresponding  contempt  for  weakness  and 
self-indulgence.  In  his  second  and  final  Address 
to  the  students  of  St.  Andrews  he  took  Calvinism 
as  his  theme. l  By  this  time  Froude  had  acquired 
a  great  name,  and  was  known  all  over  the  world 
as  the  most  brilliant  of  living  English  historians. 
Although  his  uncompromising  treatment  of  Mary 
Stuart  had  provoked  remonstrance,  his  eulogy  of 
Knox  and  Murray  was  congenial  to  the  Scottish 
temperament,  with  which  he  had  much  in  common. 
It  was  indeed  from  St.  Andrews  alone  that  he 
had  hitherto  received  any  public  recognition. 
He  was  grateful  to  the  students,  and  gave 
them  of  his  best,  so  that  this  lecture  may  be 
taken  as  an  epitome  of  his  moral  and  religious 
belief. 

"  Calvinism,"  he  told  these  lads,  "  was  the 
spirit  which  rises  in  revolt  against  untruth ;  the 
spirit  which,  as  I  have  shown  you,  has  appeared 
and  reappeared,  and  in  due  time  will  appear 
again,  unless  God  be  a  delusion  and  man  be  as 
the  beasts  that  perish.  For  it  is  but  the  in- 
flashing  upon  the  conscience  with  overwhelming 
force  of  the  nature  and  origin  of  the  laws  by  which 
mankind  are  governed — laws  which  exist,  whether 

1  Short  Studies,  vol.  ii.  pp.   1-60. 


THE    HISTORY  145 

we  acknowledge  them  or  whether  we  deny  them, 
and  will  have  their  way,  to  our  weal  or  woe,  ac- 
cording to  the  attitude  in  which  we  please  to  place 
ourselves  towards  them — inherent,  like  electricity, 
in  the  nature  of  things,  not  made  by  us,  not  to 
be  altered  by  us,  but  to  be  discerned  and  obeyed 
by  us  at  our  everlasting  peril."  The  essence  of 
Froude's  belief,  not  otherwise  dogmatic,  was  a 
constant  sense  of  God's  presence  and  overruling 
power.  Sceptical  his  mind  in  many  ways  was. 
The  two  things  he  never  doubted,  and  would  not 
doubt,  were  theism  and  the  moral  law.  Without 
God  there  would  be  no  religion.  Without  morality 
there  would  be  no  difference  between  right  and 
wrong.  This  simple  creed  was  sufficient  for  him, 
as  it  has  been  sufficient  for  some  of  the  greatest 
men  who  ever  lived.  Epicureanism  in  all  its  forms 
was  alien  to  his  nature.  "  It  is  not  true,"  he  said 
at  St.  Andrews,  "  that  goodness  is  synonymous 
with  happiness.  The  most  perfect  being  who  ever 
trod  the  soil  of  this  planet  was  called  the  Man  of 
Sorrows.  If  happiness  means  absence  of  care 
and  inexperience  of  painful  emotion,  the  best 
securities  for  it  are  a  hard  heart  and  a  good  diges- 
tion. If  morality  has  no  better  foundation  than 
a  tendency  to  promote  happiness,  its  sanction  is 
but  a  feeble  uncertainty."  Remembering  where 
he  stood,  and  speaking  from  the  fulness  of  his 
mind,  Froude  exclaimed :  "  Norman  Leslie  did 
not  kill  Cardinal  Beaton  down  in  the  castle  yonder 
because  he  was  a  Catholic,  but  because  he  was 

(2310)  IO 


146  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

a  murderer.  The  Catholics  chose  to  add  to  their 
already  incredible  creed  a  fresh  article,  that  they 
were  entitled  to  hang  and  burn  those  who  differed 
from  them  ;  and  in  this  quarrel  the  Calvinists, 
Bible  in  hand,  appealed  to  the  God  of  battles." 

The  importance  of  this  striking  Address  is  largely 
due  to  the  fact  that  it  was  composed  immediately 
after  the  History  had  been  finished,  and  may  be 
regarded  as  an  epilogue.  It  breathes  the  spirit, 
though  it  discards  the  trappings,  of  Puritanism  and 
the  Reformation .  Luther  ' '  was  one  of  the  grandest 
men  that  ever  lived  on  earth.  Never  was  any 
one  more  loyal  to  the  light  that  was  in  him,  braver, 
truer,  or  wider-minded  in  the  noblest  sense  of  the 
word."  About  Calvinism  Froude  disagreed  with 
Carlyle,  who  loved  to  use  the  old  formulas,  though 
he  certainly  did  not  use  them  in  the  old  sense. 
"It  is  astonishing  to  find,"  Froude  wrote  to 
Skelton,  "  how  little  in  ordinary  life  the  Calvinists 
talked  or  wrote  about  doctrine.  The  doctrine 
was  never  more  than  the  dress.  The  living  crea- 
ture was  wholly  moral  and  political — so  at  least  I 
think  myself."  Such  language  was  almost  enough 
to  bring  John  Knox  out  of  his  grave.  Could  he 
have  heard  it,  he  would  have  felt  that  he  was 
being  confounded  with  Maitland,  who  thought  God 
"  ane  nursery  bogill."  But  though  the  attempt  to 
represent  Knox  or  Calvin  as  undogmatic  may  be 
fanciful,  it  is  the  purest,  noblest,  and  most  per- 
manent part  of  Calvinism  that  Froude  invited  the 
students  of  St.  Andrews  to  cherish  and  preserve. 


CHAPTER    V 

FROUDE  AND   FREEMAN 

T]7ROUDE'S  reputation  as  an  historian  was 
JL  seriously  damaged  for  a  time  by  the  per- 
sistent attacks  of  The  Saturday  Review.  It  is 
difficult  for  the  present  generation  to  understand 
the  influence  which  that  celebrated  periodical 
exercised,  or  the  terror  which  it  inspired,  forty 
years  ago.  The  first  editor,  Douglas  Cook,  was 
a  master  of  his  craft,  and  his  colleagues  included 
the  most  brilliant  writers  of  the  day.  Matthew 
Arnold,  who  was  not  one  of  them,  paid  them  the 
compliment  of  treating  them  as  the  special 
champions  of  Philistia,  the  chosen  garrison  of 
Gath.  On  most  subjects  they  were  fairly  im- 
partial, holding  that  there  was  nothing  new  and 
nothing  true,  and  that  if  there  were  it  wouldn't 
matter.  But  the  proprietor *  of  the  paper  at  that 
time  was  a  High  Churchman,  and  on  ecclesiastical 
questions  he  put  forward  his  authority.  Within 
that  sphere  he  would  not  tolerate  either  neutrality 
or  difference  of  opinion.  To  him,  and  to  those 

1  Alexander  James  Beresford  Hope,  some  time  member  for  the 
University  of  Cambridge. 


148  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

who  thought  like  him,  Froude's  History  was 
anathema.  Their  detested  Reformation  was  set 
upon  its  legs  again ;  Bishop  Fisher  was  removed 
from  his  pedestal ;  the  Church  of  England,  which 
since  Keble's  assize  sermon  had  been  the  Church 
of  the  Fathers,  was  shown  to  be  Protestant  in  its 
character  and  Parliamentary  in  its  constitution. 
The  Oxford  Movement  seemed  to  be  discredited, 
and  that  by  a  man  who  had  once  been  enlisted 
in  its  service.  It  was  necessary  that  the  pre- 
sumptuous iconoclast  should  be  put  down,  and 
taught  not  to  meddle  with  things  which  were 
sacred. 

From  the  first  The  Saturday  Review  was  hostile, 
but  it  was  not  till  1864  that  the  campaign 
became  systematic.  At  that  time  the  editor 
secured  the  services  of  Edward  Augustus  Freeman, 
who  had  been  for  several  years  a  contributor  on 
miscellaneous  topics.  Freeman  is  well  known  as 
the  historian  of  the  Norman  Conquest,  as  an 
active  politician,  controversialist,  and  pamphleteer. 
Froude  toiled  for  months  and  years  over  parch- 
ments and  manuscripts  often  almost  illegible, 
carefully  noting  the  caligraphy,  and  among  the 
authors  of  a  joint  composition  assigning  his  proper 
share  to  each.  Freeman  wrote  his  History  of  the 
Norman  Conquest ,  upon  which  he  was  at  this  time 
engaged,  entirely  from  books,  without  consulting 
a  manuscript  or  an  original  document  of  any  kind. 
Every  historian  must  take  his  own  line,  and  the 
public  are  concerned  not  with  processes,  but  with 


FROUDE    AND    FREEMAN  149 

results.  I  wish  merely  to  point  out  the  fact  that, 
as  between  Froude  and  Freeman,  the  assailed  and 
the  assailant,  Froude  was  incomparably  the  more 
laborious  student  of  the  two.  It  would  be  hard  to 
say  that  one  historian  should  not  review  the  work 
of  another ;  but  we  may  at  least  expect  that  he 
should  do  so  with  sympathetic  consideration  for 
the  difficulties  which  all  historians  encounter,  and 
should  not  pass  sentence  until  he  has  all  the 
evidence  before  him.  What  were  Freeman's  quali- 
fications for  delivering  an  authoritative  judgment 
on  the  work  of  Froude  ?  Though  not  by  any 
means  so  learned  a  man  as  his  tone  of  conscious 
superiority  induced  people  to  suppose,  he  knew 
his  own  period  very  well  indeed,  and  his  acquaint- 
ance with  that  period,  perhaps  also  his  veneration 
for  Stubbs,  had  given  him  a  natural  prejudice  in 
favour  of  the  Church.  For  the  Church  of  the 
middle  ages,  the  undivided  Church  of  Christ,  was 
even  in  its  purely  mundane  aspect  the  salvation  of 
society,  the  safeguard  of  law  and  order,  the  last 
restraint  of  the  powerful,  and  the  last  hope  of  the 
wretched. 

Historically,  if  not  doctrinally,  Freeman  was 
a  High  Churchman,  and  his  ecclesiastical  leanings 
were  a  great  advantage  to  him  in  dealing 
with  the  eleventh  century.  It  was  far  otherwise 
when  he  came  to  write  of  the  sixteenth.  If  the 
Church  of  the  sixteenth  century  had  been  like 
the  Church  of  the  eleventh  century,  or  the  twelfth, 
or  the  thirteenth,  there  would  have  been  no 


150  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

Reformation,  and  no  Froude.  Freeman  lived,  and 
loved,  the  controversial  life.  Sharing  Gladstone's 
politics  both  in  Church  and  State,  he  was  in 
all  secular  matters  a  strong  Liberal,  and  his  hatred 
of  Disraeli  struck  even  Liberals  as  bordering  on 
fanaticism.  Yet  his  hatred  of  Disraeli  was  as 
nothing  to  his  hatred  of  Froude.  By  nature  "  so 
over-violent  or  over-civil  that  every  man  with 
him  was  God  or  devil,"  he  had  erected  Froude  into 
his  demon  incarnate.  Other  men  might  be,  Froude 
must  be,  wrong.  He  detested  Froude' s  opinions. 
He  could  not  away  with  his  style.  Freeman's  own 
style  was  forcible,  vigorous,  rhetorical,  hard  ;  the 
sort  of  style  which  Macaulay  might  have  written 
if  he  had  been  a  pedant  and  a  professor  instead 
of  a  politician  and  a  man  of  the  world.  It  was 
not  ill  suited  for  the  blood-and-thunder  sort  of 
reviewing  to  which  his  nature  disposed  him,  and 
for  the  vengeance  of  the  High  Churchmen  he 
seemed  an  excellent  tool. 

Freeman's  biographer,  Dean  Stephens,  pre- 
serves absolute  and  unbroken  silence  on  the  duel 
between  Freeman  and  Froude.  I  think  the  Dean's 
conduct  was  judicious.  But  there  is  no  reason 
why  a  biographer  of  Froude  should  follow  his  ex- 
ample. On  the  contrary,  it  is  absolutely  essential 
that  he  should  not ;  for  Freeman's  assiduous 
efforts,  first  in  The  Saturday,  and  afterwards  in  The 
Contemporary,  Review,  did  ultimately  produce  an 
impression,  never  yet  fully  dispelled,  that  Froude 
was  an  habitual  garbler  of  facts  and  constitu- 


FROUDE    AND    FREEMAN  151 

tionally  reckless  of  the  truth.  But,  before  I 
come  to  details,  let  me  say  one  word  more  about 
Freeman's  qualifications  for  the  task  which  he  so 
lightly  and  eagerly  undertook.  Freeman,  with  all 
his  self-assertion,  was  not  incapable  of  candour. 
He  was  staunch  in  friendship,  and  spoke  openly 
to  his  friends.  To  one  of  them,  the  excellent  Dean 
Hook,  famous  for  his  Lives  of  the  Archbishops 
of  Canterbury,  he  wrote,  on  the  27th  of  April, 
1857,  "  You  have  found  me  out  about  the  sixteenth 
century.  I  fancy  that,  from  endlessly  belabouring 
Froude,  I  get  credit  for  knowing  more  of  those 
times  than  I  do.  But  one  can  belabour  Froude 
on  a  very  small  amount  of  knowledge,  and  you  are 
quite  right  when  you  say  that  I  have  '  never 
thrown  the  whole  force  of  my  mind  on  that  portion 
of  history.'  "  l  These  words  pour  a  flood  of  light 
on  the  temper  and  knowledge  with  which  Freeman 
must  have  entered  on  what  he  really  seemed  to 
consider  a  crusade.  His  object  was  to  belabour 
Froude.  His  own  acquaintance  with  the  subject 
was,  as  he  says,  "  very  small,"  but  sufficient 
for  enabling  him  to  dispose  satisfactorily  of  an 
historian  who  had  spent  years  of  patient  toil  in 
thorough  and  exhaustive  research.  On  another 
occasion,  also  writing  to  Hook,  whom  he  could 
not  deceive,  he  said,  "  I  find  I  have  a  reputa- 
tion with  some  people  for  knowing  the  sixteenth 
century,  of  which  I  am  profoundly  ignorant." 

1  Life  and  Letters  of  E.  A.  Freeman,  vol.  i.  p.  381. 
1  Ibid.  p.  382. 


152  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

It  does  not  appear  to  have  struck  him  that  he 
had  done  his  best  in  The  Saturday  Review  to 
make  people  think  that,  as  Froude's  critic,  he 
deserved  the  reputation  which  he  thus  frankly 
and  in  private  disclaims. 

Another  curious  piece  of  evidence  has  come 
to  light.  After  Freeman's  death  his  library 
was  transferred  to  Owens  College,  Manchester, 
and  there,  among  his  other  books,  is  his  copy 
of  Froude's  History.  He  once  said  himself,  in 
reference  to  his  criticism  of  Froude,  "  In  truth 
there  is  no  kind  of  temper  in  the  case,  but  only 
a  strong  sense  of  amusement  in  bowling  down 
one  thing  after  another."  Let  us  see.  Here  are 
some  extracts  from  his  marginal  notes.  "  A  lie, 
teste  Stubbs,"  as  if  Stubbs  were  an  authority, 
in  the  proper  sense  of  the  term,  any  more  than 
Froude.  Authorities  are  contemporary  witnesses, 
or  original  documents.  Another  entry  is  "  Beast," 
and  yet  another  is  "Bah!"  "  May  I  live  to  em- 
bowel James  Anthony  Froude  "  is  the  pious  aspira- 
tion with  which  he  has  adorned  another  page. 
"  Can  Froude  understand  honesty  ?  "  asks  this 
anxious  inquirer;  and  again,  "Supposing  Master 
Froude  were  set  to  break  stones,  feed  pigs,  or 
do  anything  else  but  write  paradoxes,  would  he 
not  curse  his  day  ?  "  Along  with  such  graceful 
compliments  as  "  You've  found  that  out  since 
you  wrote  a  book  against  your  own  father," 
"  Give  him  as  slave  to  Thirlwall,"  there  may 
be  seen  the  culminating  assertion,  "  Froude  is 


FROUDE    AND    FREEMAN  153 

certainly  the  vilest  brute  that  ever  wrote  a  book." 
Yet  there  was  "  no  kind  of  temper  in  the  case," 
and  "  only  a  strong  sense  of  amusement."  I 
suppose  it  must  have  amused  Freeman  to  call 
another  historian  a  vile  brute.  But  it  is  fortunate 
that  there  was  no  temper  in  the  case.  For  if 
there  had,  it  would  have  been  a  very  bad  temper 
indeed. 

In  this  judicial  frame  of  mind  did  Freeman  set 
himself  to  review  successive  volumes  of  Froude's 
Elizabeth.  Froude  did  not  always  correct  his 
proofs  with  mechanical  accuracy,  and  this  gave 
Freeman  an  advantage  of  which  he  was  not  slow 
to  avail  himself.  "  Mr.  Froude,"  he  says  in  The 
Saturday  Review  for  the  3oth  of  January,  1864, 
"  talks  of  a  French  attack  on  Guienne }  evidently 
meaning  Guisnes.  It  is  hardly  possible  that  this 
can  be  a  misprint."  It  was  of  course  a  misprint, 
and  could  hardly  have  been  anything  else. 
Guisnes  was  a  town,  and  could  be  attacked. 
Guienne  was  a  province,  and  would  have  been 
invaded.  Guienne  had  been  a  French  province 
since  the  Hundred  Years'  War,  and  therefore  the 
French  would  neither  have  attacked  nor  invaded 
it.  As  if  all  this  were  not  enough  to  show 
the  nature  and  source  of  the  error,  the  word  was 
correctly  printed  in  the  marginal  heading.  In 
the  same  article,  after  quoting  Froude's  denial  that 
a  sentence  described  by  the  Spanish  Ambassador 
de  Silva  as  having  been  passed  upon  a  pirate  could 
have  been  pronounced  in  an  English  court  of 


154  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

justice,  Freeman  asked,  "Is  it  possible  that  Mr. 
Froude  has  never  heard  of  the  peine  forte  et 
dure  ?  "  Freeman  of  course  knew  it  to  be  im- 
possible. He  knew  also  that  the  peine  forte  et 
dure  was  inflicted  for  refusing  to  plead,  and  that 
this  pirate,  by  de  Silva's  own  account,  had  been 
found  guilty.  But  he  wanted  to  suggest  that 
Froude  was  an  ignoramus,  and  for  the  purpose 
of  beating  a  dog  one  stick  is  as  good  as  another. 

Freeman's  trump  card,  however,  was  the 
Bishop  of  Lexovia,  and  that  brilliant  victory 
he  never  forgot.  Froude  examined  the  strange 
and  startling  allegation,  cited  by  Macaulay  in 
his  introductory  chapter,  that  during  the  reign 
of  Henry  VIII.  seventy-two  thousand  persons 
perished  by  the  hand  of  the  public  executioner. 
He  traced  it  to  the  Commentaries  of  Cardan,  an 
astrologer,  not  a  very  trustworthy  authority,  who 
had  himself  heard  it,  he  said,  from  "  an  unknown 
Bishop  of  Lexovia."  '  Unknown,"  observed  Free- 
man, with  biting  sarcasm,  "to  no  one  who  has 
studied  the  history  of  Julius  Caesar  or  of  Henry  II." 
Froude  had  not  been  aware  that  Lexovia  was  the 
ancient  name  for  the  modern  Lisieux,  and  for 
twenty  years  he  was  periodically  reminded  of  the 
fact.  Had  he  followed  Freeman's  methods,  he 
might  have  asked  whether  his  critic  really  supposed 
that  there  were  bishops  in  the  time  of  Julius  Caesar. 
Freeman  failed  to  see  that  the  point  was  not  the 
modern  name  of  Lexovia,  but  the  number  of 
persons  put  to  death  by  Henry,  on  which 


FROUDE    AND    FREEMAN  155 

Froude  had  shown  the  worthlessness  of  popular 
tradition. 

Bishop  Hooper  was  burnt  at  Gloucester  in  the 
Cathedral  Close.  Froude  describes  the  scene  of 
the  execution  as  "an  open  space  opposite  the 
College."  That  shows,  says  Freeman,  that  Froude 
did  not,  like  Macaulay,  visit  the  scenes  of  the 
events  he  described.  Perhaps  he  did  not  visit 
Gloucester,  or  even  Guisnes.  That  Freeman's 
general  conclusion  was  entirely  wide  of  the  mark 
a  single  letter  from  Froude  to  Skelton  is  enough 
to  show.  "  I  want  you  some  day,"  he  wrote  on 
the  I2th  of  December,  1863,  "  to  go  with  me  to 
Loch  Leven,  and  then  to  Stirling,  Perth,  and 
Glasgow.  Before  I  go  farther  I  must  have  a 
personal  knowledge  of  Loch  Leven  Castle  and  the 
grounds  at  Langside.  Also  I  must  look  at  the 
street  at  Linlithgow  where  Murray  was  shot."  l 
Thus  Freeman's  amiable  inference  was  the  exact 
reverse  of  the  truth. 

Some  of  Freeman's  methods,  however,  were 
a  good  deal  less  scrupulous  than  this.  By 
way  of  bringing  home  to  Froude  "  ecclesias- 
tical malignity  of  the  most  frantic  kind,"  he 
cited  the  case  of  Bishop  Coxe.  "  To  Hatton," 
Froude  wrote  in  his  text,2  "  was  given  also  the 
Naboth's  vineyard  of  his  neighbour  the  Bishop 
of  Ely."  In  a  long  note  he  commented  upon  the 
Bishop's  inclination  to  resist,  and  showed  how 

1  Table  Talk  of  Shirley,  p.   131. 

1  History  of  England,  vol.  xi.  p.  321. 


156  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

the  "  proud  prelate "  was  "  brought  to  reason 
by  means  so  instructive  on  Elizabeth's  mode  of 
conducting  business  when  she  had  not  Burghley 
or  Walsingham  to  keep  her  in  order  that "  the 
whole  account  is  given  at  length  in  the  words  of 
Lord  North,  whom  she  employed  for  the  purpose. 
This  letter  from  Lord  North  is  extremely  valuable 
evidence.  Froude  read  it  and  transcribed  it  from 
the  collection  of  manuscripts  at  Hatfield.  As  an  idle 
rumour  that  Froude  spent  only  one  day  at  Hatfield 
obtained  currency  after  his  death,  it  may  be  con- 
venient to  mention  here  that  the  work  which  he 
did  there  in  copying  manuscripts  alone  must  have 
occupied  him  at  least  a  month.  Now  let  us  see 
what  use  Freeman  made  of  the  information  thus 
given  him  by  Froude.  "  Meanwhile/'  he  says  in 
The  Saturday  Review  for  the  22nd  of  January,  1870, 
"Mr.  Froude  is  conveniently  silent  as  to  the  in- 
famous tricks  played  by  Elizabeth  and  her  courtiers 
in  order  to  make  estates  for  court  favourites  out  of 
Episcopal  lands.  A  line  or  two  of  text  is  indeed 
given  to  the  swindling  transaction  by  which 
Bishop  Coxe  of  Ely  was  driven  to  surrender  his. 
London  house  to  Sir  Christopher  Hatton.  But 
why  ?  Because  the  story  gives  Mr.  Froude  an 
opportunity  of  quoting  at  full  length  a  letter  from 
Lord  North  to  the  Bishop  in  which  all  the  Bishop's 
real  or  pretended  enormities  are  strongly  set 
forth."  Here  follows  a  short  extract  from  the 
letter,  in  which  North  accused  Coxe  of  grasping 
covetousness.  Now  it  is  perfectly  obvious  to 


FROUDE    AND    FREEMAN  157 

any  one  having  the  whole  letter  before  him,  as 
Freeman  had,  that  Froude  quoted  it  with  the 
precisely  opposite  aim  of  denouncing  the  conduct 
of  Elizabeth  to  the  Bishop,  whom  he  compares 
with  Naboth.  Freeman  must  have  heard  of 
Naboth.  He  must  have  known  what  Froude 
meant.  Yet  the  whole  effect  of  his  comments 
must  have  been  to  make  the  readers  of  The 
Saturday  Review  think  that  Froude  was  attacking 
the  Church,  when  he  was  attacking  the  Crown  for 
its  conduct  to  the  Church. 

Freeman  seemed  to  glory  in  his  own  defici- 
encies, and  was  almost  as  proud  of  what 
he  did  not  know  as  of  what  he  did.  Thus, 
for  instance,  Froude,  a  born  man  of  letters, 
was  skilful  and  accomplished  in  the  employment 
of  metaphors.  Freeman  could  no  more  handle 
a  metaphor  than  he  could  fish  with  a  dry  fly. 
He  therefore,  without  the  smallest  consciousness 
of  being  absurd,  condemned  Froude  for  doing 
what  he  was  unable  to  do  himself,  and  even 
wrote,  in  the  name  of  The  Saturday  Review,  "  We 
are  no  judges  of  metaphors,"  though  there  must 
surely  have  been  some  one  on  the  staff  who  knew 
something  about  them 

Froude  had  a  mode  of  treating  documents 
which  is  open  to  animadversion.  He  did  not,  as 
Mr.  Pollard  happily  puts  it  in  the  Dictionary  of 
National  Biography,  "  respect  the  sanctity  of  in- 
verted commas."  They  ought  to  imply  textual 
quotation.  Froude  used  them  for  his  abridgments, 


158  LIFE   OF    FROUDE 

openly  proclaiming  the  fact  that  he  had  abridged, 
and  therefore  deceiving  no  one.  Freeman's  com- 
ment upon  this  irregularity  is  extremely  character- 
istic. "  Now  we  will  not  call  this  dishonest ;  we 
do  not  believe  that  Mr.  Froude  is  intentionally 
dishonest  in  this  or  any  other  matter  ;  but  then 
it  is  because  he  does  not  know  what  literary 
honesty  and  dishonesty  are."  There  is  no  such 
thing  as  literary  honesty,  or  scientific  honesty, 
or  political  honesty.  There  is  only  one  kind  of 
honesty,  and  an  honest  man  does  not  misrepresent 
an  opponent,  as  Freeman  misrepresented  Froude. 
To  call  a  man  a  liar  is  an  insult.  To  say  that  he 
is  not  a  liar  because  he  does  not  know  the  difference 
between  truth  and  falsehood  is  a  cowardly  insult. 
But  Froude  was  soon  avenged.  Freeman  gave 
himself  into  his  adversary' s  hands .  ' '  Sometimes,' ' 
he  wrote,1  "  Mr.  Froude  gives  us  the  means  of 
testing  him.  Let  us  try  a  somewhat  remarkable 
passage.  He  tells  us  "It  had  been  argued  in 
the  Admiralty  Courts  that  the  Prince  of  Orange, 
'  having  his  principality  of  his  title  in  France, 
might  make  lawful  war  against  the  Duke  of  Alva,' 
and  that  the  Queen  would  violate  the  rules  of 
neutrality  if  she  closed  her  ports  against  his 
cruisers."  Then  follows  a  Latin  passage  from 
which  the  English  is  paraphrased.  "  We  pre- 
sume," continues  Freeman  in  fancied  triumph, 
"  that  the  words  put  by  Mr.  Froude  in  inverted 
commas  are  not  Lord  Burghley's  summary  of 

1  Saturday  Review,  Nov.  24th,  1866. 


FROUDE    AND    FREEMAN  159 

the  Latin  extract  in  the  note,  but  Mr.  Froude's 
own,  for  it  is  utterly  impossible  that  Burghley 
could  have  so  misconceived  a  piece  of  plain 
Latin,  or  have  so  utterly  misunderstood  the 
position  of  any  contemporary  prince."  Pre- 
sumption indeed.  I  have  before  me  a  photograph 
of  Burghley 's  own  words  in  his  own  writing 
examined  by  Froude  at  the  Rolls  House.  They 
are  "  Question  whether  the  Prince  of  Orange, 
being  a  free  prince  of  the  Empire,  and  also  having 
his  principality  of  his  title  in  France,  might  not 
make  a  just  war  against  the  Duke  of  Alva." 
Froude  abridged,  and  wrote  "  lawful  "  for  "  just." 
But  the  words  which  Freeman  says  that  Burghley 
could  not  have  used  are  the  words  which  he  did 
use,  and  the  explanation  is  simple  enough.  Free- 
man was  Freeman.  Burghley  was  a  statesman. 
Burghley  of  course  knew  perfectly  well  that  Orange 
was  not  subject  to  the  King  of  France,  not  part  of 
his  dominions,  which  is  Freeman's  objection.  He 
called  it  in  France  because  it,  and  the  Papal 
possessions  of  Venaissin  adjoining  it,  were  sur- 
rounded by  French  territory.  He  called  it  "  in 
France,"  as  we  should  call  the  Republic  of  San 
Marino  "  in  Italy  "  now.  Freeman  might  have 
ascertained  what  Burghley  did  write  if  he  had 
cared  to  know.  He  did  not  care  to  know.  He 
was  ;<  belabouring  Froude." 

Once  Froude  was  weak  enough  to  accept  Free- 
man's correction  on  a  small  point,  only  to  find 
that  Freeman  was  entirely  in  error,  and  that  he 


160  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

himself  had  been  right  all  along.  After  much  vitu- 
perative language  not  worth  repeating,  Freeman 
wrote  in  The  Saturday  Review  for  the  5th  of 
February,  1870,  these  genial  words,  "As  it  is, 
there  is  nothing  to  be  done  but  to  catch  Mr. 
Froude  whenever  he  comes  from  his  hiding-place 
at  Simancas  into  places  in  which  we  can  lie 
in  wait  for  him."  The  sneer  at  original  research 
is  characteristic  of  Freeman.  One  can  almost  hear 
his  self-satisfied  laugh  as  he  wrote  this  unlucky 
sentence,  "  The  thing  is  too  grotesque  to  talk 
about  seriously ;  but  can  we  trust  a  single 
uncertified  detail  from  the  hands  of  a  man  who 
throughout  his  story  of  the  Armada  always  calls 
the  Ark  Royal  the  Ark  Raleigh  ?  .  .  .  It  is  the 
sort  of  blunder  which  so  takes  away  one's  breath 
that  one  thinks  for  the  time  that  it  must  be  right. 
We  do  not  feel  satisfied  till  we  have  turned  to 
our  Camden  and  seen  '  Ark  Regis  '  staring  us  full 
in  the  face."  Freeman  did  not  know  the  meaning 
of  historical  research  as  conducted  by  a  real 
scholar  like  Froude.  Froude  had  not  gone  to 
Camden,  who  in  Freeman's  eyes  represented  the 
utmost  stretch  of  Elizabethan  learning.  If  Free- 
man had  had  more  natural  shrewdness,  it  might 
have  occurred  to  him  that  the  name  of  a  great 
seaman  was  not  an  unlikely  name  for  a  ship.  But 
he  could  never  fall  lightly,  and  heavily  indeed  did 
he  fall  on  this  occasion.  With  almost  incredible 
fatuity,  he  wrote,  "  The  puzzle  of  guessing  how 
Mr.  Froude  got  at  so  grotesque  a  union  of  words 


FROUDE   AND    FREEMAN  161 

as  '  Ark  Raleigh  '  fades  before  the  greater  puzzle 
of  guessing  what  idea  he  attached  to  the  words 
'  Ark  Raleigh  '  when  he  had  got  them  together." 
When  Freeman  was  most  hopelessly  wrong  he 
always  began  to  parody  Macaulay.  Corruptio 
optimi  pessima.  "  Ark  Raleigh  "  means  Raleigh's 
ship,  and  Froude  took  the  name,  "  Ark  Rawlie  " 
as  it  was  then  spelt,  from  the  manuscripts  at  the 
Rolls  House.  He  was  of  course  right,  and  Freeman 
was  wrong.  But  that  is  not  all.  Freeman  could 
easily  have  put  himself  right  if  he  had  chosen  to 
take  the  trouble.  Edwards' s  Life  of  Raleigh  ap- 
peared in  1868,  and  a  copy  of  it  is  in  Freeman's 
library  at  Owens  College.  Edwards  gives  an 
account  of  the  Ark  Raleigh ,  which  was  built  for 
Sir  Humphrey  Gilbert,  Raleigh  advancing  two 
hundred  pounds.  Freeman,  however,  need  not 
have  read  this  book  to  find  out  the  truth.  For 
"the  Ark  Raleigh"  occurs  fourteen  times  in  a 
Calendar  of  Manuscripts  from  1581  to  1590, 
published  by  Robert  Lemon  in  1865.  When 
Freeman  was  brought  to  book,  and  taxed  with  this 
gross  blunder,  he  pleaded  that  he  "  did  a  true 
verdict  give  according  to  such  evidence  as  came 
before  him."  The  implied  analogy  is  misleading. 
Jurymen  are  bound  by  their  oaths,  and  by  their 
duty,  to  find  a  verdict  one  way  or  the  other. 
Freeman  was  under  no  obligation  to  say  anything 
about  the  Ark  Raleigh.  Prudence  and  ignorance 
might  well  have  restrained  his  pen. 

Two  blots  in  Froude' s  History  Freeman  may, 
(2310)  ii 


i62  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

I  think,  be  acknowledged  to  have  hit.  One  was 
intellectual ;  the  other  was  moral.  It  was  pure 
childishness  to  suggest  that  Froude  had  never 
heard  of  the  peine  forte  et  dure,  and  only  invincible 
prejudice  could  have  dictated  such  a  sentence  as 
"  That  Mr.  Froude' s  law  would  be  queer  might 
be  taken  as  a  matter  of  course."  l  Still,  it  is  true, 
and  a  serious  misfortune,  that  Froude  took  very 
little  interest  in  legal  and  constitutional  questions. 
For,  while  they  had  not  the  same  importance  in 
the  sixteenth  century  as  they  had  in  the  seven- 
teenth, they  cannot  be  disregarded  to  the  extent  in 
which  Froude  disregarded  them  without  detract- 
ing from  the  value  of  his  book  as  a  whole.  He 
did  not  sit  down,  like  Hallam,  to  write  a  con- 
stitutional history,  and  he  could  not  be  expected 
to  deal  with  his  subject  from  that  special  point 
of  view.  Freeman's  complaint,  which  is  quite 
just,  was  that  he  neglected  almost  entirely  the 
relations  of  the  Crown  with  the  Houses  of 
Parliament  and  with  the  courts  of  law.  The 
moral  blot  accounts  for  a  good  deal  of  the 
indignation  which  Froude  excited  in  minds  far 
less  jaundiced  than  Freeman's.  No  one  hated 
injustice  more  than  Froude.  But  cruelty  as 
such  did  not  inspire  him  with  any  horror.  No 
punishment,  however  atrocious,  seemed  to  him  too 
great  for  persons  clearly  guilty  of  enormous  crimes. 
I  have  already  referred  to  his  defence  of  the  horrible 
Boiling  Act  which  disgraced  the  reign  and  the 

1  Saturday  Review,  Jan.  29th,  1870. 


FROUDE   AND    FREEMAN  163 

Parliament  of  Henry  VIII.  The  account  of  Mary 
Stuart's  old  and  wizened  face  as  it  appeared  when 
her  false  hair  and  front  had  been  removed  after  her 
execution  may  be  set  down  as  an  error  of  taste. 
But  what  is  to  be  said,  on  the  score  of  humanity, 
for  an  historian  who  in  the  nineteenth  century 
calmly  and  in  cold  blood  defended  the  use  of  the 
rack  ?  Even  here  Freeman's  ingenuity  of  sug- 
gestion did  not  desert  him.  After  quoting  part, 
and  part  only,  of  Froude's  sinister  apology,  he 
writes,  "  To  all  this  the  answer  is  very  simple. 
Every  time  that  Elizabeth  and  her  counsellors 
sent  a  prisoner  to  the  rack  they  committed  a 
breach  of  the  law  of  England."  l  Any  one  who 
read  this  article  without  reading  the  History 
would  infer  that  Froude  had  maintained  the 
legality,  as  well  as  the  expediency,  of  torture. 
That  is  not  true.  What  Froude  says  is,  "A 
practice  which  by  the  law  was  always  forbidden 
could  be  palliated  only  by  a  danger  so  great  that 
the  nation  had  become  like  an  army  in  the  field. 
It  was  repudiated  on  the  return  of  calmer  times, 
and  the  employment  of  it  rests  a  stain  on  the 
memory  of  those  by  whom  it  was  used.  It  is 
none  the  less  certain,  however,  that  the  danger 
was  real  and  terrible,  and  the  same  causes  which 
relieve  a  commander  in  active  service  from  the 
restraints  of  the  common  law  apply  to  the  conduct 
of  statesmen  who  are  dealing  with  organised 
treason.  The  law  is  made  for  the  nation,  not  the 

1  Saturday  Review,  Dec.  ist,  1867. 


164  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

nation  for  the  law.  Those  who  transgress  it  do 
it  at  their  own  risk,  but  they  may  plead  circum- 
stances at  the  bar  of  history,  and  have  a  right  to 
be  heard."  Thus  Froude  asserts  as  strongly  and 
clearly  as  Freeman  himself  that  torture  was  in 
1580,  and  always  had  been,  contrary  to  the  law 
of  England.  On  the  purely  legal  and  technical 
aspect  of  the  question  a  point  might  be  raised 
which  neither  Froude  nor  Freeman  has  attempted 
to  solve.  Would  any  Court  in  the  reign  of  Eliza- 
beth have  convicted  a  man  of  a  criminal  offence 
for  carrying  out  the  express  commands  of  the 
sovereign  ?  If  not,  in  what  sense  was  the 
racking  of  the  Jesuits  illegal  ?  But  there  is  a 
law  of  God,  as  well  as  a  law  of  man,  and  surely 
Elizabeth  broke  it.  Froude' s  argument  seems 
to  prove  too  much,  if  it  proves  anything,  for  it 
would  justify  all  the  worst  cruelties  ever  inflicted 
by  tyrants  for  political  objects,  from  the  burning 
of  Christians  who  refused  incense  for  the  Roman 
Emperor  to 

Luke's  iron  crown,  and  Damien's  bed  of  steel. 

The  analogy  of  a  commander  in  active  service  is 
inadequate.  Elizabeth,  Burghley,  Walsingham, 
were  not  commanders  on  active  service ;  and 
if  they  had  been,  they  would  have  had  no 
right,  on  any  Christian  or  civilised  principle,  to 
torture  prisoners.  Unless  the  end  justifies  the 
means,  in  which  case  there  is  no  morality,  the 
rack  was  an  abomination,  and  those  who  applied 


FROUDE    AND    FREEMAN  165 

it  to  extort  either  confession  or  evidence  debased 
themselves  to  the  level  of  the  Holy  Inquisitors. 
Froude  did  not,  I  grieve  to  say,  stop  at  an  apology 
for  the  rack.  In  a  passage  which  must  always  dis- 
figure his  book  he  thus  describes  the  fate  of  Antony 
Babington  and  those  who  suffered  with  him  in  1586. 
1  They  were  all  hanged  but  for  a  moment, 
according  to  the  letter  of  the  sentence,  taken  down 
while  the  susceptibility  of  agony  was  still  unim- 
paired, and  cut  in  pieces  afterwards  with  due 
precautions  for  the  protraction  of  the  pain.  If 
it  was  to  be  taken  as  part  of  the  Catholic  creed 
that  to  kill  a  prince  in  the  interests  of  Holy  Church 
was  an  act  of  piety  and  merit,  stern  English 
common  sense  caught  the  readiest  means  of  ex- 
pressing its  opinion  on  the  character  both  of  the 
creed  and  its  professors." 

Stern  English  common  sense  !  To  suggest  that 
the  English  people  had  anything  to  do  with  it  is 
a  libel  on  the  English  nation.  Elizabeth  had  the 
decency  to  forbid  the  repetition  of  such  atrocities. 
That  she  should  have  tolerated  them  at  all  is  a 
stain  upon  her  character,  as  his  sophistical  plea 
for  them  is  a  stain  upon  Froude's. 

On  the  I2th  of  January,  1870,  Freeman  delivered 
in  The  Saturday  Review  his  final  verdict  on 
Froude's  History  of  England  from  the  Fall  of  Wolsey 
to  the  Defeat  of  the  Spanish  Armada.  It  is  one  of 
the  most  preposterous  judgments  that  ever  found 
their  way  into  print.  In  knowledge  of  the  subject, 
and  in  patient  assiduity  of  research,  Froude  was 


166  LIFE   OF    FROUDE 

immeasurably  Freeman's  superior,  and  his  life  had 
been  devoted  to  historic  studies.     Yet  this  was 
the  language  in  which  the  editor  of  the  first  literary 
journal  in  England  permitted  Freeman  to  write 
of  the  greatest  historical  work  completed  since 
Macaulay  died:  "  He  has  won  his  place  among  the 
popular  writers  of  the  day ;  his  name  has  come  to 
be  used  as  a  figure  of  speech,  sometimes  in  strange 
company  with  his  betters.  .  .  .  But  an  historian 
he  is  not ;  four  volumes  of  ingenious  paradox,  eight 
volumes  of  ecclesiastical  pamphlet,  do  not  become 
a  history,  either  because  of  the  mere  number  of 
volumes,  or  because  they  contain  a  narrative  which 
gradually  shrinks  into  little  more  than  a  narrative 
of  diplomatic  intrigues.     The  main  objections  to 
Mr.  Froude's  book,  the  blemishes  which  cut  it  off 
from  any  title  to  the  name  of  history,  are  utter 
carelessness  as  to  facts  and  utter  incapacity   to 
distinguish  right  from  wrong.  .  .  .  That  burning 
zeal  for  truth,  for  truth  in  all  matters  great  and 
small,  that  zeal  which  shrinks  from  no  expenditure 
of  time  and  toil  in  the  pursuit  of  truth — the  spirit 
without  which  history,  to  be  worthy  of  the  name, 
cannot  be  written — is  not  in  Mr.  Froude's  nature, 
and  it  would  probably  be  impossible  to  make  him 
understand  what  it  is.  .  .  .  How  far  the  success 
of  the  book  is  due  to  its  inherent  vices,  how  far 
to  its  occasional  virtues,  is  a  point  too  knotty  for 
us  to  solve.     The  general  reader  and  his  tastes — 
why  this  thing  pleases  him  and  the  other  thing 
displeases  him — have  ever  been  to  us  the  pro- 


FROUDE    AND    FREEMAN  167 

foundest  of  mysteries.  It  is  enough  that  on 
Mr.  Froude's  book,  as  a  whole,  the  verdict  of  all 
competent  historical  scholars  has  long  ago  been 
given.  Occasional  beauties  of  style  and  narrative 
cannot  be  allowed  to  redeem  carelessness  of  truth, 
ignorance  of  law,  contempt  for  the  first  principles 
of  morals,  ecclesiastical  malignity  of  the  most 
frantic  kind.  There  are  parts  of  Mr.  Froude's 
volumes  which  we  have  read  with  real  pleasure, 
with  real  admiration.  But  the  book,  as  a  whole, 
is  vicious  in  its  conception,  vicious  in  its  execution. 
No  merit  of  detail  can  atone  for  the  hollowness 
that  runs  through  the  whole.  Mr.  Froude  has 
written  twelve  volumes,  and  he  has  made  himself 
a  name  in  writing  them,  but  he  has  not  written, 
in  the  pregnant  phrase  so  aptly  quoted  by  the 
Duke  of  Aumale,  '  un  livre  de  bonne  foy.'  " l 

By  a  curious  irony  of  fate  or  circumstance 
Freeman  has  unconsciously  depicted  the  frame  of 
mind  in  which  Froude  approached  historic  pro- 
blems. '  That  burning  zeal  for  truth,  for  truth 
in  all  matters  great  and  small,  that  zeal  which 
shrinks  from  no  expenditure  of  time  and  toil  in 
the  pursuit  of  truth — the  spirit  without  which 
history,  to  be  worthy  of  the  name,  cannot  be 
written,''  was  the  dominant  principle  of  Froude's 
life  and  work.  He  had  hitherto  taken  no  notice 
of  the  attacks  in  The  Saturday  Review.  The 
errors  pointed  out  in  them  were  of  the  most 

1  The  Duke  was  not,  as  Freeman  implies  that  he  was,  referring 
to  Froude. 


168  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

trivial  kind,  and  mere  abuse  is  not  worth  a 
reply.  But  even  Gibbon  was  moved  from  his 
philosophic  calm  when  Mr.  Somebody  of  Some- 
thing "  presumed  to  attack  not  the  faith  but 
the  fidelity  of  the  historian."  Froude  passed  over 
in  contemptuous  silence  impertinent  reflections 
upon  his  religious  belief.  His  honesty  was  now  in 
set  terms  impugned,  and  on  the  I5th  of  February, 
1870,  he  addressed,  through  the  editor  of  The 
Pall  Mall  Gazette,  Mr.  Frederick  Greenwood,  a 
direct  challenge  to  Mr.  Philip  Harwood,  who  had 
become  editor  of  The  Saturday  Review.  After  a 
few  caustic  remarks  upon  the  absurdity  of 
the  defects  imputed  to  him,  such  as  ignorance 
that  Parliament  could  pass  Bills  of  Attainder, 
because  he  had  said  that  the  House  of  Lords 
would  not  pass  one  in  a  particular  case,  he 
came  to  close  quarters  with  the  imputation  of 
bad  faith.  "  I  am,"  he  said,  "  peculiarly  situ- 
ated " — as  Freeman  of  course  knew — "  towards  a 
charge  of  this  kind,  for  nine-tenths  of  my  docu- 
ments are  in  manuscript,  and  a  large  proportion 
of  those  manuscripts  are  in  Spain.  To  deal  as 
fairly  as  I  can  with  the  public,  I  have  all  along 
deposited  my  Spanish  transcripts,  as  soon  as  I  have 
done  with  them,  in  the  British  Museum.  The 
reading  of  manuscripts,  however,  is  at  best  labori- 
ous. The  public  may  be  inclined  to  accept  as 
proved  an  uncontradicted  charge,  the  value  of 
which  they  cannot  readily  test.  I  venture  there- 
fore to  make  the  following  proposal.  I  do  not 


FROUDE    AND    FREEMAN          169 

make  it  to  my  reviewer.  He  will  be  reluctant  to 
exchange  communications  with  me,  and  the  dis- 
inclination will  not  be  on  his  side  only.  I  address 
myself  to  his  editor.  If  the  editor  will  select  any 
part  of  my  volumes,  one  hundred,  two  hundred, 
three  hundred  pages,  wherever  he  pleases,  I  am 
willing  to  subject  them  to  a  formal  examination 
by  two  experts,  to  be  chosen — if  Sir  Thomas  Hardy 
will  kindly  undertake  it — by  the  Deputy  Keeper 
of  the  Public  Records.  They  shall  go  through  my 
references,  line  for  line.  They  shall  examine  every 
document  to  which  I  have  alluded,  and  shall  judge 
whether  I  have  dealt  with  it  fairly.  I  lay  no  claim 
to  be  free  from  mistakes.  I  have  worked  in  all 
through  nine  hundred  volumes  of  letters,  notes, 
and  other  papers,  private  and  official,  in  five 
languages  and  in  difficult  handwritings.  I  am  not 
rash  enough  to  say  that  I  have  never  misread 
a  word,  or  overlooked  a  passage  of  importance. 
I  profess  only  to  have  dealt  with  my  materials 
honestly  to  the  best  of  my  ability.  I  submit 
myself  to  a  formal  trial,  of  which  I  am  willing  to 
bear  the  entire  expense,  on  one  condition — that 
the  report,  whatever  it  be,  shall  be  published 
word  for  word  in  The  Saturday  Review" 

The  proposal  was  certainly  a  novel  one,  and 
could  not  in  ordinary  circumstances  have  been 
accepted.  But  it  is  also  novel  to  charge  an  his- 
torian of  the  highest  character  and  repute  with 
inability  to  speak  the  truth,  or  to  distinguish 
between  truth  and  falsehood.  Freeman,  signing 


170  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

himself  "  Mr.  Froude's  Saturday  Reviewer/'  re- 
plied in  The    Pall  Mall  Gazette,     The    challenge 
he  left  to  the  editor  of  The  Saturday,  who  con- 
temptuously refused  it,  and  he  admitted  that  after 
all  Froude  probably    did  know  what  a    Bill  of 
Attainder  was.     The  rest  of  his  letter  is  a  shuffle. 
"  I  have  made    no  charge  of  bad  faith  against 
Mr.    Froude" — whom    he    had   accused    of    not 
knowing  what  truth  meant — "  with  regard  to  any 
Spanish  manuscripts,  or  any  other  manuscripts. 
All  that  I  say  is,  that  as  I  find  gross  inaccuracies 
in  Mr.  Froude's  book,  which  he  does  not  specify, 
whenever  I  have  the  means  of  testing  him  " 
which  was  certainly  not  often — "  I  think  there  is 
a  presumption  against  his  accuracy  in  those  parts 
where  I  have  not  the  means  of  testing  him.     But 
this  i$  only  a  presumption,  and  not  proof.     Mr. 
Froude  may  have  been  more  careful,   or  more 
lucky  " — meaning  less  fraudulent,  or  more  skilful 
— "  with  the  hidden  wealth  of  Simancas  than  he 
has  been  with  regard  to  materials  which  are  more 
generally  accessible.     I  trust  it  may  prove  so." 
If  Freeman  thought  that  he  meant  that,  he  must 
have  had  singular  powers  of  self-deception.     u  I 
have  been  twitted  by  men  of  thought  and  learn- 
ing " — whom  he    does  not   name — "  for    letting 
Mr.    Froude  off   too   easily,  and  I  am    inclined 
to  plead  guilty  to  the  charge.     I  do  not  suppose 
that  Mr.  Froude  wilfully  misrepresents  anything  ; 
the  fault  seems  to  be  inherent  and  incurable  ;   he 
does  not  know  what  historical  truth  is,  or  how  a 


FROUDE    AND    FREEMAN  171 

man  should  set  about  looking  for  it.  As  therefore 
his  book  is  not  written  with  that  regard  for  truth 
with  which  a  book  ought  to  be  written,  I  hold 
that  I  am  justified  in  saying  that  it  is  not  '  un 
livre  de  bonne  foy.'  ' 

It  is  difficult  to  read  this  disingenuous  farrago 
of  insinuation  even  now  without  a  strong  sense  of 
moral  contempt.  But  vengeance  was  coming,  and 
before  many  years  were  over  his  head  Freeman 
had  occasion  to  remember  the  Horatian  tag  : 

Raro  antecedentem  scelestum 
Deseruit  pede  poena  claudo. 

Froude  himself  took  the  matter  very  lightly.  He 
had  boldly  offered  the  fullest  inquiry,  and  Freeman 
had  not  been  clever  enough  to  shelter  himself 
behind  the  plea  that  copies  were  not  originals  ;  he 
did  not  know  enough  about  manuscripts  to  think 
of  it.  The  blunders  he  had  detected  were  trifling, 
and  Froude  summed  up  the  labours  of  his  an- 
tagonists fairly  enough  in  a  letter  to  Skelton  from 
his  beloved  Derreen.1  "  I  acknowledge  to  five  real 
mistakes  in  the  whole  book — twelve  volumes — 
about  twenty  trifling  slips,  equivalent  to  i's  not 
dotted  and  t's  not  crossed  ;  and  that  is  all  that  the 
utmost  malignity  has  discovered.  Every  one  of 
the  rascals  has  made  a  dozen  blunders  of  his  own, 
too,  while  detecting  one  of  mine."  Skelton's  own 
testimony  is  worth  citing,  for,  though  a  personal 
friend,  he  was  a  true  scholar.  '  We  must  remem- 

1  June  2ist,   1870. 


172  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

her  that  he  was  to  some  extent  a  pioneer,  and  that 
he  was  the  first  (for  instance)  to  utilise  the  treasures 
of  Simancas.  He  transcribed,  from  the  Spanish, 
masses  of  papers  which  even  a  Spaniard  could 
have  read  with  difficulty,  and  I  am  assured  that 
his  translations  (with  rare  exceptions)  render  the 
original  with  singular  exactness."  l  And  in  the 
preface  to  his  Maitland  of  Lethington  the  same 
distinguished  author  says,  "  Only  the  man  or 
woman  who  has  had  to  work  upon  the  mass  of 
Scottish  material  in  the  Record  Office  can  properly 
appreciate  Mr.  Froude's  inexhaustible  industry 
and  substantial  accuracy.  His  point  of  view  is 
very  different  from  mine  ;  but  I  am  bound  to  say 
that  his  acquaintance  with  the  intricacies  of 
Scottish  politics  during  the  reign  of  Mary  appears 
to  me  to  be  almost,  if  not  quite,  unrivalled."  John 
Hill  Burton,  to  whose  learning  and  judgment 
Freeman's  were  as  moonlight  unto  sunlight,  and 
as  water  unto  wine,  concurred  in  Skelton's  view, 
and  no  one  has  ever  known  Scottish  history 
better  than  Burton. 

Freeman's  reckless  and  unscholarly  attacks  upon 
Froude  produced  no  effect  upon  his  own  master 
Stubbs,  whom  he  was  always  covering  with 
adulation.  From  the  Chair  of  Modern  History 
at  Oxford  in  1876  Stubbs  pronounced  Froude's 
"  great  book,"  as  he  called  it,  to  be  "a  work  of 
great  industry,  power,  and  importance."  Stubbs 
was  as  far  as  possible  from  agreeing  with  Froude 

1  Table  Talk  of  Shirley,  p.   143. 


FROUDE   AND    FREEMAN  173 

in  opinion.  An  orthodox  Churchman  and  a 
staunch  Tory,  he  never  varied  in  his  opposition 
to  Liberalism,  as  well  ecclesiastical  as  political, 
and  he  had  no  sympathy  with  the  reformers.  But 
his  simple,  manly,  pious  character  was  incapable 
of  supporting  his  cause  by  personal  slander.  Un- 
like Freeman,  he  had  a  rich  vein  of  racy  humour, 
which  he  indulged  in  a  famous  epigram  on  Froude 
and  Kingsley,  too  familiar  for  quotation.  But  he 
could  appreciate  Froude' s  learning  and  industry, 
for  he  was  a  real  student  himself. 

The  controversy  between  Froude  and  Freeman, 
however,  was  by  no  means  at  an  end,  and  I  may 
as  well  proceed  at  once  to  the  conclusion  of  it, 
chronology  notwithstanding.  In  the  year  1877 
Froude  contributed  to  The  Nineteenth  Century  a 
series  of  papers  on  the  Life  and  Times  of  Thomas 
Becket,  since  republished  in  the  fourth  volume 
of  his  Short  Studies.  Full  of  interesting  informa- 
tion, the  result  of  minute  pains,  and  excellent  in 
style,  they  make  no  pretence  to  be,  as  the  History 
was,  a  work  of  original  research.  They  are  indeed 
founded  upon  the  Materials  for  the  History  of 
Thomas  Becket,  which  Canon  Robertson  had  edited 
for  the  Master  of  the  Rolls  in  the  previous  year. 
They  were  of  course  read  by  every  one,  because 
they  were  written  by  Froude,  whereas  Robertson's 
learned  Introduction  would  only  have  been  read 
by  scholars.  Froude' s  conclusions  were  much  the 
same  as  the  erudite  Canon's.  He  did  not  pretend 
to  know  the  twelfth  century  as  he  knew  the 


174  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

sixteenth,  and  he  avowedly  made  use  of  another 
man's  knowledge  to  point  his  favourite  moral  that 
emancipation  from  ecclesiastical  control  was  a 
necessary  stage  in  the  development  of  English 
freedom .  He  may  have  been  unconsciously  affected 
by  his  familiarity  with  the  quarrel  between  Wolsey 
and  Henry  VIII.  in  describing  the  quarrel  between 
Becket  and  Henry  II.  The  Church  of  the  middle 
ages  discharged  invaluable  functions  which  in 
later  times  were  more  properly  undertaken  by 
the  State.  Froude  sided  with  Henry,  and  showed, 
as  he  had  not  much  difficulty  in  showing,  that 
there  were  a  good  many  spots  on  the  robe  of 
Becket' s  saintliness.  The  immunity  of  Church- 
men, that  is,  of  clergymen,  from  the  jurisdiction 
of  secular  tribunals  was  not  conducive  either  to 
morality  or  to  order. 

Froude' s  essays  might  have  been  forgotten,  like 
other  brilliant  articles  in  other  magazines,  if 
Freeman  had  let  them  alone.  But  the  spectacle 
of  Froude  presuming  to  write  upon  those  earlier 
periods  of  which  The  Saturday  Review  had  so 
often  and  so  dogmatically  pronounced  him  to  be 
ignorant,  drove  Freeman  into  print.  If  he  had 
disagreed  with  Froude  on  the  main  question,  the 
only  question  which  matters  now,  he  would  have 
been  justified,  and  more  than  justified,  in  setting 
out  the  opposite  view.  A  defence  of  Becket  against 
Henry,  of  the  Church  against  the  State,  from  the 
pen  of  a  competent  writer,  would  have  been  as 
interesting  and  as  important  a  contribution  as 


FROUDE    AND    FREEMAN  175 

Froude's  own  papers  to  the  great  issue  between 
Sacerdotalism  and  Erastianism.  There  is  a  great 
deal  more  to  be  said  for  Becket  than  for 
Wolsey  ;  and  though  Freeman  found  it  difficult  to 
state  any  case  with  temperance,  he  could  have 
stated  this  case  with  power.  But,  much  as  he 
disliked  Froude,  he  agreed  with  him.  "  Looking," 
he  wrote,  "  at  the  dispute  between  Henry  and 
Thomas  by  the  light  of  earlier  and  of  later  ages, 
we  see  that  the  cause  of  Henry  was  the  right  one  ; 
that  is,  we  see  that  it  was  well  that  the  cause  of 
Henry  triumphed  in  the  long  run."  Nevertheless 
he  rushed  headlong  upon  his  victim,  and  "  be- 
laboured" Froude,  with  all  the  violence  of  which 
he  was  capable,  in  The  Contemporary  Review. 
Hitherto  his  attacks  had  been  anonymous.  Now 
for  the  first  time  he  came  into  the  open,  and 
delivered  his  assault  in  his  own  name.  Froude's 
forbearance,  as  well  as  his  own  vanity,  had  blinded 
him  to  the  danger  he  was  incurring.  The  first 
sentence  of  his  first  article  explains  the  fury  of  an 
invective  for  which  few  parallels  could  be  found 
since  the  days  of  the  Renaissance.  "  Mr.  Froude's 
appearance  on  the  field  of  mediaeval  history  will 
hardly  be  matter  of  rejoicing  to  those  who  have 
made  mediaeval  history  one  of  the  chief  studies 
of  their  lives."  Freeman's  pedantry  was,  as 
Matthew  Arnold  said,  ferocious,  and  he  seems  to 
have  cherished  the  fantastic  delusion  that  particu- 
lar periods  of  history  belonged  to  particular  histo- 
rians. Before  writing  about  Becket  Froude  should, 


176  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

according  to  this  primitive  doctrine,  have  asked 
leave  of  Freeman,  or  of  Stubbs,  or  of  an  industrious 
clergyman,  Professor  Brewer,  who  edited  with 
ability  and  learning  several  volumes  of  the  Rolls 
Series.  That  to  warn  off  Froude  would  be  to  warn 
off  the  public  was  so  much  the  better  for  the  pur- 
poses of  an  exclusive  clique.  For  Froude' s  style, 
that  accursed  style  which  was  gall  and  wormwood 
to  Freeman,  "  had,"  as  he  kindly  admitted,  "  its 
merits."  Page  after  page  teems  with  mere  abuse, 
a  sort  of  pale  reflection,  or,  to  vary  the  metaphor, 
a  faint  echo  from  Cicero  on  Catiline,  or  Burke  on 
Hastings.  "  On  purely  moral  points  there  is  no 
need  now  for  me  to  enlarge  ;  every  man  who  knows 
right  from  wrong  ought  to  be  able  to  see  through 
the  web  of  ingenious  sophistry  which  tries  to 
justify  the  slaughter  of  More  and  Fisher  "  ;  al- 
though the  guilt  of  More  and  Fisher  is  a  question 
not  of  morality,  but  of  evidence.  "Mr.  Froude  by 
his  own  statement  has  not  made  history  the  study 
of  his  life,"  which  was  exactly  what  he  had  done, 
and  stated  that  he  had  done.  '  The  man  who 
insisted  on  the  Statute-book  being  the  text  of 
English  history  showed  that  he  had  never  heard 
of  peine  forte  et  dure,  and  had  no  clear  notion  of  a 
Bill  of  Attainder." 

Freeman  could  not  even  be  consistent  in  abuse 
for  half  a  page.  Immediately  after  charging 
Froude  with  "  fanatical  hatred  towards  the  English 
Church,  reformed  or  unreformed " — though  he 
was  the  great  champion  of  the  Reformation — "  a 


FROUDE    AND    FREEMAN  177 

degree  of  hatred  which  must  be  peculiar  to  those 
who  have  entered  her  ministry  and  forsaken  it " — 
like  Freeman's  bosom  friend  Green — he  says  that 
Froude  "  never  reaches  so  high  a  point  as  in 
several  passages  where  he  describes  various  scenes 
and  features  of  monastic  life."  But  this  could  not 
absolve  him  from  having  made  a  "  raid  "  upon 
another  man's  period,  from  being  a  "  marauder," 
from  writing  about  a  personage  whom  Stubbs 
might  have  written  about,  though  he  had  not. 
Froude  had  "  an  inborn  and  incurable  twist, 
which  made  it  impossible  for  him  to  make  an 
accurate  statement  about  any  matter."  "  By 
some  destiny  which  it  would  seem  that  he  cannot 
escape,  instead  of  the  narrative  which  he  finds — 
at  least  which  all  other  readers  find — in  his  book 
he  invariably  substitutes  another  narrative  out  of 
his  own  head."  '  Very  few  of  us  can  test  manu- 
scripts at  Simancas  ;  it  is  not  every  one  who  can 
at  a  moment's  notice  test  references  to  manuscripts 
much  nearer  home."  This  is  a  strange  insinuation 
from  a  man  who  never  tested  a  manuscript,  seldom, 
if  ever,  consulted  a  manuscript,  and  had  declined 
Froude' s  challenge  to  let  his  copies  be  compared 
with  his  abridgment.  One  grows  tired  of  tran- 
scribing a  mere  succession  of  innuendoes.  Yet  it  is 
essential  to  clear  this  matter  up  once  and  for  all, 
that  the  public  may  judge  between  Froude  and 
his  life-long  enemy. 

The  standard  by  which  Freeman  affected  to 
judge  Froude' s  articles  in  The  Nineteenth  Century 

12 


178  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

was  fantastic.  "  Emperors  and  Popes,  Sicilian 
Kings  and  Lombard  Commonwealths,  should  be 
as  familiar  to  him  who  would  write  The  Life  and 
Times  of  Thomas  Becket  as  the  text  of  the  Con- 
stitutions of  Clarendon  or  the  relations  between 
the  Sees  of  Canterbury  and  York."  If  Froude  had 
written  an  elaborate  History  of  Henry  II.,  as  he 
wrote  a  History  of  Henry  VIII.,  he  would  have 
qualified  himself  in  the  manner  somewhat  bom- 
bastically described.  But  even  Lord  Acton,  who 
seemed  to  think  that  he  could  not  write  about 
anything  until  he  knew  everything,  would  scarcely 
have  prepared  himself  for  an  article  in  The  Nine- 
teenth Century  by  mastering  the  history  of  the 
world.  And  if  Froude  had  done  so,  it  would  have 
profited  him  little.  He  would  have  forgotten  it, 
"with  that  calm  oblivion  of  facts  which  distin- 
guishes him  from  all  other  men  who  have  taken  on 
themselves  to  read  past  events."  He  would  still 
have  written  "  whatever  first  came  into  his  head, 
without  stopping  to  see  whether  a  single  fact 
bore  his  statements  out  or  not."  "  Accurate 
statement  of  what  really  happened,  even  though 
such  accurate  statement  might  serve  Mr. 
Froude' s  purpose,  is  clearly  forbidden  by  the  des- 
tiny which  guides  Mr.  Froude's  literary  career." 
These  extracts  from  The  Contemporary  Review 
are  samples,  and  only  samples,  from  a  mass  of 
rhetoric  not  unworthy  of  the  grammarian  who 
prayed  for  the  damnation  of  an  opponent  because 
he  did  not  agree  with  him  in  his  theory  of  irregular 


FROUDE    AND    FREEMAN  179 

verbs.  Freeman,  whose  self-assertion  was  per- 
petual, represented  himself  throughout  his  libel 
as  fighting  for  the  cause  of  truth.  His  own 
reverence  for  truth  he  illustrated  quaintly  enough 
at  the  close  of  his  last  article.  "  I  leave  others 
to  protest,"  said  this  veracious  critic,  "against 
Mr.  Froude's  treatment  of  the  sixteenth  century. 
I  do  not  profess  to  have  mastered  those  times  in 
detail  from  original  sources."  I  leave  others  to 
protest  !  From  1864  to  1870  Freeman  had  con- 
tinuously attacked  successive  volumes  of  Froude's 
History  in  The  Saturday  Review.  Yet  he  here 
makes  in  his  own  name  a  statement  quite  irre- 
concilable with  his  ever  having  done  anything  of 
the  kind,  and  accompanies  it  with  an  admission 
which,  if  it  had  been  made  in  The  Saturday  Review , 
would  have  robbed  his  invective  of  more  than  half 
its  sting. 

And  now  let  us  see  what  was  the  real  foundation 
for  this  imposing  fabric.  Freeman's  boisterous 
truculence  made  such  a  deafening  noise,  and  raised 
such  a  blinding  dust,  that  it  takes  some  little  time 
and  trouble  to  discover  the  hollowness  of  the 
charges.  With  four-fifths  of  Froude's  narrative  he 
does  not  deal  at  all,  except  to  borrow  from  it  for 
his  own  purposes,  as  he  used  to  borrow  from  the 
History  in  The  Saturday  Review.  In  the  other 
fifth,  the  preliminary  pages,  he  discovered  two 
misprints  of  names,  one  mistake  of  fact,  and  three 
or  four  exaggerations.  Not  one  of  these  errors 
is  so  grave  as  his  own  statement,  picked  up  from 


i8o  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

some  bad  lawyer,  that  "  the  preamble  of  an  Act 
of  Parliament  need  not  be  received  as  of  any 
binding  effect."  The  preamble  is  part  of  the 
Act,  and  gives  the  reasons  why  the  Act  was 
passed.  Of  course  the  rules  of  grammar  show 
that  being  explanatory  it  is  not  an  operative 
part ;  but  it  can  be  quoted  in  any  court  of 
justice  to  explain  the  meaning  of  the  clauses. 

In  his  Annals  of  an  English  Abbey  Froude 
allowed  "  Robert  Fitzwilliam  "  to  pass  for  Robert 
Fitzwalter  in  his  proofs,  and  upon  this  con- 
clusive evidence  that  Froude  was  unfit  to 
write  history  Freeman  pounced  with  triumphant 
exultation.  He  had  some  skill  in  the  correc- 
tion of  misprints,  and  would  have  been  better 
employed  in  revising  proof-sheets  for  Froude 
than  in  "  belabouring  "  him.  Froude  said  that 
Becket's  name  "  denoted  Saxon  extraction."  An 
anonymous  biographer,  not  always  accurate,  says 
that  both  his  parents  came  from  Normandy.  It 
is  probable,  though  by  no  means  certain,  that  in 
this  case  the  biographer  was  right,  and  Froude 
corrected  the  mistake  when,  in  consequence  of 
Freeman's  criticisms,  he  republished  the  articles. 
Froude,  on  the  authority  of  Edward  Grim,  who 
knew  Becket,  and  wrote  his  Life,  referred  to  the 
cruelty  and  ferocity  of  Becket's  administration 
as  Chancellor.  Freeman  declared  that  "  anything 
more  monstrous  never  appeared  from  the  pen  of 
one  who  professed  to  be  narrating  facts."  Froude 
not  only  "  professed  "  to  be  narrating  facts :  he 


FROUDE    AND    FREEMAN  181 

was  narrating  them.  The  only  question  is  whether 
they  happened  in  England,  in  Toulouse,  or  in 
Aquitaine.  Freeman  exposed  his  own  ignorance 
by  alleging  that  Grim  meant  the  suppression  of 
the  free  lances,  which  happened  before  Becket 
became  Chancellor.  He  did  not  in  fact  know  the 
subject  half  so  well  as  Froude,  though  Froude 
might  have  more  carefully  qualified  his  general 
words.  Froude' s  account  of  Becket' s  appoint- 
ment to  the  Archbishopric  of  Canterbury,  his 
scruples,  and  how  he  overcame  them,  is  described 
by  Freeman  as  "  pure  fiction."  It  was  taken  from 
William  of  Canterbury,  and,  though  open  to  doubt 
upon  some  points,  is  quite  as  likely  to  be  true  as  the 
narrative  preferred  by  Freeman.  The  most  serious 
error,  indeed  the  only  serious  error,  attributed  by 
Freeman  to  Froude  is  the  statement  that  Becket' s 
murderers  were  shielded  from  punishment  by 
the  King.  Freeman  alleges  with  his  usual  con- 
fidence that  they  could  not  be  tried  in  a  secular 
court  because  their  victim  was  a  bishop.  It  is 
doubtful  whether  a  lay  tribunal  ever  admitted 
such  a  plea,  and  the  Constitutions  of  Clarendon, 
which  were  in  force  at  the  time  of  Becket' s  assas- 
sination, abolished  clerical  privileges  altogether. 
Here  Froude  was  almost  certainly  right,  and 
Freeman  almost  certainly  wrong. 

But  Freeman  was  not  content  with  making 
mountains  of  mole-hills,  with  speaking  of  a  great 
historian  as  if  he  were  a  pretentious  dunce.  He 
stooped  to  write  the  words,  "  Natural  kindliness,  if 


182  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

no  other  feeling,  might  have  kept  back  the  fiercest 
of  partisans  from  ignoring  the  work  of  a  long- 
forgotten  brother,  and  from  dealing  stabs  in  the 
dark  at  a  brother's  almost  forgotten  fame."  The 
meaning  of  this  sentence,  so  far  as  it  has  a 
meaning,  was  that  Hurrell  Froude  composed  a 
fragment  on  the  Life  of  Becket  which  the  mistaken 
kindness  of  friends  published  after  his  own  pre- 
mature death.  If  Froude  had  written  anony- 
mously against  this  work,  the  phrase  "  stabs  in 
the  dark  "  would  have  been  intelligible.  As  he 
had  written  in  his  own  name,  and  had  not  men- 
tioned his  brother's  work  at  all,  part  at  least  of 
the  accusation  was  transparently  and  obviously 
false. 

At  last,  however,  Freeman  had  gone  too  far. 
Froude  had  borne  a  great  deal,  he  could  bear  no 
more ;  and  he  took  up  a  weapon  which  Freeman 
never  forgot.  I  can  well  recall,  as  can  hundreds  of 
others,  the  appearance  in  The  Nineteenth  Century 
for  April,  1879,  of  "  A  Few  Words  on  Mr.  Freeman." 
They  were  read  with  a  sense  of  general  pleasure  and 
satisfaction,  a  boyish  delight  in  seeing  a  big  bully 
well  thrashed  before  the  whole  school.  Froude 
was  so  calm,  so  dignified,  so  self-restrained,  so 
consciously  superior  to  his  rough  antagonist  in 
temper  and  behaviour.  Only  once  did  he  show 
any  emotion.  It  was  when  he  spoke  of  the 
dastardly  attempt  to  strike  him  through  the 
memory  of  his  brother.  "  I  look  back  upon  my 
brother,"  he  said,  "as  on  the  whole  the  most 


FROUDE    AND    FREEMAN  183 

remarkable  man  I  have  ever  met  in  my  life.     I 
have  never  seen  any  person — not  one — in  whom, 
as  I  now  think  of  him,  the  excellences  of  intellect 
and  character  were  combined  in  fuller  measure. 
Of  my  personal  feeling   towards   him  I   cannot 
speak.     I  am  ashamed  to  have  been  compelled, 
by  what  I  can  only  describe  as  an  inexcusable 
insult,  to  say  what  I  have  said."     It  was  not 
difficult  to  show  that  Freeman's  four  articles  in 
The  Contemporary  Review  contained  worse  blunders 
than  any  he  had  attributed  to  Froude,  as,  for 
instance,  the  allegation  that  Henry  VIII.,  who 
founded  bishoprics  and  organised  the  defence  of 
the  country,  squandered  away  all  that  men  before 
his  time  had  agreed  to  respect.     Easy  also  was  it 
to  disprove  the  charge  of  "  hatred  towards  the 
English  Church  at  all  times  and  under  all  char- 
acters "  by  the  mere  mention  of  Cranmer,  Latimer, 
Ridley,  and  Hooper.     The  statement  that  Froude 
had  been  a  "  fanatical  votary  "  of  the  mediaeval 
Church  was  almost  delicious  in  the  extravagance  of 
its  absurdity;  and  it  would  have  been  impossible 
better  to  retort  the  wild  charges  of  misrepresenta- 
tion, in  which  it  is  hard  to  suppose  that  even  Free- 
man himself  believed,  than  by  the  simple  words, 
'  It  is  true  that  I  substitute  a  story  in  English 
for  a  story  in  Latin,  a  short  story  for  a  long  one, 
and  a  story  in  a  popular  form  for  a  story  in  a 
scholastic  one."     In  short,  Froude  wrote  a  style 
which  every  scholar  loves,  and  every  pedant  hates. 
With  a  light  touch,  but  a   touch  which   had   a 


184  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

sting,  Froude  disposed  of  the  nonsense  which 
made  him  translate  prcedictce  rationes  "  shortened 
rations  "  instead  of  "  the  foregoing  accounts,"  and 
in  a  graver  tone  he  reminded  the  public  that  his 
offer  to  test  the  accuracy  of  his  extracts  from 
unprinted  authorities  had  been  refused.  Graver 
still,  and  not  without  indignation,  is  his  reference 
to  Freeman's  suggestion  that  he  thought  the 
Cathedral  Church  of  St.  Albans  had  been  de- 
stroyed. Most  people,  when  they  finished  Froude's 
temperate  but  crushing  refutation,  must  have  felt 
surprised  that  the  opportunity  for  it  should  ever 
have  arisen. 

Froude  had  done  his  work  at  last,  and  done 
it  thoroughly.  Freeman's  plight  was  not  to  be 
envied.  If  his  offence  had  been  rank,  his  punish- 
ment had  been  tremendous.  Even  The  Spectator, 
which  had  hitherto  upheld  him  through  thick  and 
thin,  admonished  him  that  he  had  passed  the 
bounds  of  decency  and  infringed  the  rules  of 
behaviour.  Dreading  a  repetition  of  the  penalty 
if  he  repeated  the  offence,  fearing  that  silence 
would  imply  acquiescence  in  charges  of  persistent 
calumny,  he  blurted  out  a  kind  of  awkward  half- 
apology.  He  confessed,  in  The  Contemporary 
Review  for  May,  1879,  that  he  had  criticised  in 
The  Saturday  all  the  volumes  of  Froude's  Elizabeth. 
This  self-constituted  champion  proceeded  to  say 
that  he  knew  nothing  about  Froude's  personal 
character,  and  that  when  he  accused  Froude  of 
stabbing  his  dead  brother  "  in  the  dark  "  he  only 


FROUDE    AND    FREEMAN  185 

meant  that  the  brother  was  dead.  When  he  says 
that  Froude's  article  was  "  plausible,  and  more 
than  plausible,"  he  is  quite  right.  It  is  more 
than  plausible,  because  it  is  true.  After  vainly 
trying  to  explain  away  some  of  the  errors  brought 
home  to  him  by  Froude,  and  leaving  others  un- 
noticed, he  complains,  with  deep  and  obvious 
sincerity,  that  Froude  had  not  read  his  books,  nor 
even  his  articles  in  Encyclopaedias.  He  exhibits 
a  striking  instance  of  his  own  accuracy.  In  his 
defence  against  the  rather  absurd  charge  of  not 
going,  as  Macaulay  had  gone,  to  see  the  places 
about  which  he  wrote,  Froude  pleaded  want  of 
means.  Freeman  rejoined  that  Macaulay  was  at 
one  time  of  his  life  "  positively  poor."  He  was  so 
for  a  very  short  time  when  his  Fellowship  at 
Trinity  came  to  an  end.  Unluckily  for  Freeman's 
statement  the  period  was  before  his  appointment 
to  be  Legal  Member  of  Council  in  India,  and  long 
before  he  had  begun  to  write  his  History  of 
England.  The  most  charitable  explanation  of  an 
erroneous  statement  is  usually  the  correct  one,  and 
it  was  probably  forgetfulness  which  made  Freeman 
say  that  he  did  not  hear  of  Froude's  having  placed 
copies  of  the  Simancas  manuscripts  in  the  British 
Museum  till  1878,  whereas  he  had  himself  discussed 
it  in  The  Pall  Mall  Gazette  eight  years  before.  If 
Froude  had  made  such  an  astonishing  slip,  there 
would  have  been  more  ground  for  imputing  to  him 
an  incapacity  to  distinguish  between  truth  and 
falsehood.  Freeman's  "Last  Words  on  Mr.  Froude" 


186  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

show  no  sign  of  penitence  or  good  feeling,  and  they 
end  with  characteristic  bluster  about  the  truth, 
from  which  he  had  so  grievously  departed.  But 
Froude  was  never  troubled  with  him  again. 

Although  a  refuted  detractor  is  not  formidable 
in  the  flesh,  the  evil  that  he  does  lives  after  him. 
Freeman's  view  of  Froude  is  not  now  held  by  any 
one  whose  opinion  counts ;  yet  still   there  seems 
to  rise,  as  from  a  brazen  head  of  Ananias,  the 
dismal  and  monotonous  chaunt,   "  He  was  careless 
of  the  truth,  he  did  not  make  history  the  business 
of  his  life."     He  did  make  history  the  business  of 
his  life,  and  he  cared   more  for  truth   than   for 
anything  else  in  the  world.     Freeman's  biographer 
has  given  no  clue  to  his  imperfect  sympathy  with 
Froude.     Green,  true  historian  as  he  was,  made 
more   mistakes  than  Froude,   and  the  mistakes 
he  did  make  were  more  serious.     He  trespassed 
on  the  preserves  of  Brewer,  who  criticised  him 
severely    without   deviating    from    the   standard 
of  a  Christian  and  a  gentleman.     Even  over  the 
domain  of  Stubbs,  and  the  consecrated  ground  of 
the  Norman  Conquest  itself,  Green  ranged  without 
being  Freemanised  as  a  poacher.     But  then  Green 
was  Freeman's  personal  friend,  and  in  friendship 
Freeman   was   staunch.     They   belonged   to   the 
same  set,   and  no  one  was  more  cliquish  than 
Freeman.     Liberal  as  he  was  in  politics,  he  always 
professed  the  utmost  contempt  for  the  general 
public,  and  wondered  what  guided  their  strange 
tastes    in    literature.      Dean    Stephens   has    ap- 


FROUDE    AND    FREEMAN  187 

parently  suppressed  most  of  the  references 
to  Froude  in  Freeman's  private  letters,  and  cer- 
tainly he  drops  no  hint  of  the  controversy  about 
Becket.  But  the  following  passage  from  his  "  Con- 
cluding Survey  "  is  apparently  aimed  at  Froude. 
Freeman,  we  are  told,  "  was  unable  to  write  or 
speak  politely  " — and  if  the  Dean  had  stopped 
there  I  should  have  had  nothing  to  say ;  but  he 
goes  on — "  of  any  one  who  pretended  to  more 
knowledge  than  he  really  had,  or  who  enjoyed  a 
reputation  for  learning  which  was  undeserved; 
nay,  more,  he  considered  it  to  be  a  positive  duty  to 
expose  such  persons.  In  doing  this  he  was  often 
no  doubt  too  indifferent  to  their  feelings,  and 
employed  language  of  unwarranted  severity  which 
provoked  angry  retaliation,  and  really  weakened 
the  effect  of  his  criticism,  by  diverting  public 
sympathy  from  himself  to  the  object  of  his  attack. 
But  it  was  quite  a  mistake  to  suppose,  as  many 
did,  that  his  fierce  utterances  were  the  outcome 
of  ill-temper  or  of  personal  animosity.  He  enter- 
tained no  ill-will  whatever  towards  literary  or 
political  opponents." 

There  is  more  to  the  same  effect,  and  of 
course  Froude  must  have  been  in  Stephens's 
mind.  But  the  reputation  of  a  great  historian 
is  not  to  be  taken  away  by  hints.  It  may  suit 
Freeman's  admirers  to  seek  refuge  in  meaningless 
generalities.  Those  who  are  grateful  for  Froude' s 
services  to  England,  and  to  literature,  have  no 
interest  in  concealment.  Froude  never  "  pre- 


188  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

tended  to  more  knowledge  than  he  really  had." 
So  far  from  "  enjoying  a  reputation  for  learning 
which  was  undeserved/'  he  disguised  his  learning 
rather  than  displayed  it,  and  wore  it  lightly,  like 
a  flower.  That  Freeman  should  have  "  con- 
sidered it  to  be  a  positive  duty  to  expose  "  a  man 
whose  knowledge  was  so  much  wider  and  whose 
industry  was  so  much  greater  than  his  own  is 
strange.  That  he  did  his  best  for  years,  no 
doubt  from  the  highest  motives,  to  damage 
Froude's  reputation,  and  to  injure  his  good 
name,  is  certain.  With  the  general  reader  he  failed. 
The  public  had  too  much  sense  to  believe  that 
Froude  was  merely,  or  chiefly,  or  at  all,  an  eccle- 
siastical pamphleteer.  But  by  dint  of  noisy 
assertion,  and  perpetual  repetition,  Freeman  did 
at  last  infect  academic  coteries  with  the  idea  that 
Froude  was  a  superficial  sciolist.  The  same  thing 
had  been  said  of  Macaulay,  and  believed  by  the 
same  sort  of  people.  Froude's  books  were  cer- 
tainly much  easier  to  read  than  Freeman's.  Must 
they  therefore  have  been  much  easier  to  write  ? 
Two-thirds  of  Froude's  mistakes  would  have  been 
avoided,  and  Freeman  would  never  have  had  his 
chance,  if  the  former  had  had  a  keener  eye  for  slips 
in  his  proof-sheets,  or  had  engaged  competent  assist- 
ance. When  he  allowed  Wilhelmus  to  be  printed 
instead  of  Willelmus,  Freeman  shouted  with  ex- 
ultant glee  that  a  man  so  hopelessly  ignorant  of 
mediaeval  nomenclature  had  no  right  to  express  an 
opinion  upon  the  dispute  between  Becket  and 


FROUDE    AND    FREEMAN  189 

the  King.  Nothing  could  exceed  his  transports 
of  joy  when  he  found  out  that  Froude  did  not 
know  the  ancient  name  of  Lisieux.  Freeman 
thought,  like  the  older  Pharisees,  that  he  should 
be  heard  for  his  much  speaking,  and  for  a  time  he 
was.  People  did  not  realise  that  so  many  con- 
fident allegations  could  be  made  in  which  there 
was  no  substance  at  all.  They  thought  them- 
selves safe  in  making  allowance  for  Freeman's 
exaggeration,  and  Freeman  simply  bored  many 
persons  into  accepting  his  estimate  of  Froude. 
Perhaps  he  went  a  little  too  far  when  he  claimed 
to  have  found  inaccuracies  in  Froude' s  transcripts 
from  the  Simancas  manuscripts  without  knowing 
a  word  of  Spanish.  But  he  was  seldom  so  frank 
as  that.  It  was  not  often  that  he  forgot  his 
two  objects  of  holding  up  Froude  as  the  fluent, 
facile  ignoramus,  and  himself  as  the  profound, 
erudite  student. 

Just  after  reading  Freeman's  furious  articles  on 
Becket,  I  turned  to  Froude's  "  Index  of  Papers 
collected  by  me  October,  November,  and  Decem- 
ber, 1856."  It  covers  twenty-one  pages,  very 
closely  written,  and  I  will  give  a  few  extracts  to 
show  what  sort  of  preparation  this  sciolist  thought 
necessary  for  his  ecclesiastical  pamphlet.  The 
first  entry,  representing  four  pages  of  text,  is 
"  Hanson's  Description  of  England.  Diet,  habits, 
prices  of  provisions  from  Parliamentary  History." 
Another  is  "  Dress  and  loose  habits  of  the  London 
clergy  in  1486.  From  Morton's  Injunctions'' 


igo  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

"State  of    the  Abbey  of  St.   Albans  in   1489" 
shows   that   Froude    was   well    acquainted   with 
that  subject  many    years   before    he    wrote    his 
Short  Study  on  it.     "  The  Bishops  of  all  the  Sees 
in  England  under  Henry,  date  of  appointment, 
etc./'  is  another  of  these  items,  which  also  comprise 
"  Extracts  from  the  so-called  Privy  Purse  Expenses 
of   Henry  VIII."   "  Bulla   dementis  Papse  VII. 
concessa  Regi  Henrico  de  Secundis  nuptiis.     This 
contains  the  passage  quocunque  licito   vel  illicito 
coitu"     "  Petition  of  the  Upper  House  of  Convo- 
cation  for  the   suppression   of  heretical  books." 
"  Royal  Letter  on  the  Articles  of  1536  which  were 
written,  Henry  says,  by  himself."    "Elaborate  and 
extremely  valuable  State  Papers  on  the  Duchy  of 
Milan,  and  the  dispute  between  the  Emperor  and 
Francis  I."     "  Pole  to  James,  the  Fifth  Letter  of 
Warning."     "Pole  to  the  Pope,  May  i8th,  1537. 
N.B. — Very    remarkable."      "  Remarkable   State 
Paper  drawn  by  Pole  and  addressed  to  the  Pope  at 
the  time  of  the  interview  at  Paris  between  Francis 
and  the  Emperor."     "  Privy  Council  to  the  Duke 
of  Norfolk.     Marquis  of  Exeter  to  Sir  A.  Brown. 
Promise  of  money.    Directions  to  send  relief  to  the 
Duke  of  Suffolk  in  Lincolnshire,  etc."   "Henry  VIII. 
to  the  Duke  of  Norfolk  about  November  27th,  1536. 
Part  of  it  in  his  own  hand.     High  and  chivalrous." 
"  Curious  account  of  the  ferocity  of  the  clergy  in 
Lincolnshire."     "  Curious  questions  addressed  to 
Fisher  Bishop  of  Rochester  on  some  treasonable 
foreign  correspondence."     "  Learned  men  to  be 


FROUDE    AND    FREEMAN  191 

sent  to  preach  to  the  disaffected  counties.  Henry's 
version  of  the  causes  of  the  insurrection — N.B.,  and 
the  cure."  "  Instructions  to  the  Earl  of  Sussex 
for  tranquillising  the  North  after  the  Insurrection. 
Long  and  curious — noticeable  list  of  accusations 
against  the  monastic  bodies.  In  Wriothesley's 
hand."  "Sir Francis  Bigod  to  Sir  Robert  Constable. 
Very  remarkable  account  of  his  unpopularity 
in  the  first  rebellion  from  suspicion  of  heresy, 
January  i8th,  1537."  "  Emperor  at  Paris,  1539. 
War  between  France  and  England.  Secret  causes 
why  the  Emperor  made  a  secret  peace  with  France." 
"  Lord  Lisle  to  Henry  VIII.  on  his  chance  of  run- 
ning down  the  French  fleet  as  they  lay  at  anchor, 
July  2ist,  1545."  "  Losses  of  the  old  families  by 
the  suppression — new  foundation  by  Henry  VIII. 
Bishoprics,  hospitals,  colleges,  etc."  "  The  Abbot 
of  Coggeshall  hides  jewels,  makes  away  goods, 
maintains  Rome  and  consults  the  devil."  "  Henry 
VIII.  to  Justices  of  the  Peace,  admonition  for 
neglect  of  duty.  Highly  in  character."  "  King's 
Highness  having  discovered  all  the  enormities  of 
the  clergy,  pardons  all  that  is  past,  and  exhorts 
them  to  a  Christian  life  in  all  time  to  come." 

During  the  three  months  to  which  alone  this  list 
refers  Froude  must  have  read  and  studied  more 
than  four  hundred  pages  of  important  documents. 
If  any  one  wishes  to  form  a  correct  judgment  of 
Froude  as  an  historian,  he  can  scarcely  begin  better 
than  by  reversing  every  statement  that  Freemanfelt 
it  his  duty  to  make.  Froude  came  to  write  about 


192  LIFE   OF    FROUDE 

the  sixteenth  century  after  careful  study  of  pre- 
vious times.  He  prepared  himself  for  his  task  by 
patient  research  among  letters  and  manuscripts 
such  as  Freeman  never  thought  of  attempting. 
He  neglected  no  source  of  information  open  to 
him,  and  he  obtained  special  privileges  for  search- 
ing Spanish  archives  which  entailed  upon  him  the 
severest  labour.  He  studied  not  only  at  Simancas, 
where  none  had  been  before  him,  but  also  in  Paris, 
in  Brussels,  in  Vienna.  The  documents  he  read 
were  in  half  a  dozen  languages,  sometimes  in  the 
vilest  scrawls.  Long  afterwards  he  described  his 
own  experience  in  his  own  graphic  way.  "  Often 
at  the  end  of  a  page,"  he  said,  "  I  have  felt  as  after 
descending  a  precipice,  and  have  wondered  how 
I  got  down.  I  had  to  cut  my  way  through  a 
jungle,  for  no  one  had  opened  the  road  for  me.  I 
have  been  turned  into  rooms  piled  to  the  window- 
sill  with  bundles  of  dust-covered  despatches,  and 
told  to  make  the  best  of  it.  Often  I  have  found 
the  sand  glistening  on  the  ink  where  it  had  been 
sprinkled  when  a  page  was  turned.  There  the 
letter  had  lain,  never  looked  at  again  since  it  was 
read  and  put  away."  Out  of  such  materials 
Froude  wrote  a  History  which  any  educated  person 
can  read  with  undisturbed  enjoyment.  He  was  too 
good  an  artist  to  let  his  own  difficulties  be  seen,  and 
they  were  assumed  not  to  exist.  Froude  did  not 
write,  like  Stubbs,  for  professional  students  alone  ; 
he  wrote  for  the  general  public,  for  those  whom 
Freeman  affected  to  despise.  So  did  Macaulay, 


wtx*,-^'         ^U 

jr  <f    <? 


FROUDE    AND    FREEMAN  193 

whom  Freeman  idolised.  So  did  Gibbon,  the 
greatest  historian  of  all  time.  Froude's  History 
covered  the  most  controversial  period  in  the 
growth  of  the  English  Church.  Lynx-eyed  critics, 
with  their  powers  sharpened  by  partisanship, 
searched  it  through  and  through  for  errors  the 
most  minute.  Some  of  course  they  found.  But 
they  did  not  find  one  which  interfered  with 
the  main  argument,  and  such  evidence  as  has 
since  been  discovered  confirms  Froude's  proposi- 
tion that  the  cause  of  Henry  was  the  cause  of 
England.  Freeman's  Norman  Conquest  has  secured 
for  him  an  honourable  fame ;  his  attacks  upon 
Froude,  until  they  have  been  forgotten,  will  always 
be  a  reproach  to  his  memory. 

It  was  with  just  pride,  and  natural  satisfaction, 
that  Froude  wrote  to  Lady  Derby  in  May,  1890  : 
"  I  am  revising  my  English  History  for  a  final 
edition.  Since  I  wrote  it  the  libraries  and 
archives  of  all  Europe  have  been  searched  and 
sifted.  I  am  fairly  astonished  to  find  how  little 
I  shall  have  to  alter.  The  book  is  of  course  young, 
but  I  do  not  know  that  it  is  the  worse  on  that 
account.  That  fault  at  any  rate  I  shall  not  try 
to  cure." 

The  Divorce  of  Katharine  of  Aragon,  though  not 
published  till  1891,  is  a  sequel  to  the  History. 
The  twenty  years  which  had  intervened  did  not 
lead  Froude  to  modify  any  of  his  main  conclusions, 
and  he  was  able  to  furnish  new  evidence  in  sup- 
port of  them.  The  correspondence  of  Chapuys, 

(3310)  13 


194  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

Imperial  Ambassador  at  the  court  of  Henry  VIII., 
puts  Fisher's  treason  beyond  doubt,  and  proves 
that  the  bishop  was  endeavouring  to  procure  an 
invasion  by  Spanish  troops  when  the  king,  in 
Freeman's  language,  "  slaughtered "  him.  The 
next  year  Froude  brought  out,  in  a  volume  with 
other  essays,  his  Spanish  Story  of  the  Armada, 
written  in  his  raciest  manner,  and  proving  from 
Spanish  sources  the  grotesque  incompetence  of 
Medina  Sidonia.  There  are  few  better  narratives 
in  the  language,  and  the  enthusiastic  admira- 
tion of  a  great  American  humourist  was  as  well 
deserved  as  it  is  charmingly  expressed. 

"  The  other  night,"  wrote  Bret  Harte,  "  I 
took  up  Longman's  Magazine1  and  began  to 
lazily  read  something  about  the  Spanish  Armada. 
My  knowledge  of  that  historic  event,  I  ought 
to  say,  is  rather  hazy  ;  I  remember  a  vague 
something  about  Drake  playing  bowls  while  the 
Spanish  fleet  was  off  the  coast,  and  of  Elizabeth 
going  to  Tilbury  en  grande  tenue,  but  there  was 
always  a  good  deal  of  '  Jingo  '  shouting  and 
Crystal  Palace  fireworks  about  it,  and  it  never 
seemed  real.  In  the  article  I  was  reading  the 
style  caught  me  first ;  I  became  tremendously 
interested ;  it  was  a  new  phase  of  the  old  story, 
and  yet  there  was  something  pleasantly  familiar. 
I  turned  to  the  last  page  quickly,  and  saw  your 
blessed  name.  I  had  heard  nothing  about  it 
before.  Then  I  went  through  it  breathlessly  to 

1  The  successor  to  Prater. 


FROUDE    AND    FREEMAN  195 

the  last  word,  which  came  all  too  soon.  And  now 
I  am  as  eager  for  the  next  instalment  as  I  was 
when  a  boy  for  the  next  chapter  of  my  Dickens  or 
Thackeray.  Don't  laugh,  dear  old  fellow,  over 
my  enthusiasm  or  my  illustration,  but  remember 
that  I  represent  a  considerable  amount  of  average 
human  nature,  and  that's  what  we  all  write  for, 
and  ought  to  write  for,  and  be  dashed  to  the  critics 
who  say  to  the  contrary  !  I  thought  your  parallel 
of  Philip  and  Don  Quixote  delightful,  but  the 
similitude  of  Medina  Sidonia  and  Sancho  Panza 
is  irresistible.  That  letter  to  Philip  is  Sancho's 
own  hand  !  Where  did  you  get  it  ?  How  long 
have  you  had  it  up  your  sleeve  ?  Have  you  got 
any  more  such  cards  to  play  ?  Can  you  not  give 
us  a  picture  of  those  gentlemen  adventurers  with 
their  exalted  beliefs,  their  actual  experiences,  their 
little  jealousies,  and  the  love-lorn  Lope  de  Vega 
in  their  midst  ?  What  mankind  you  have  come 
upon,  dear  Froude  !  How  I  envy  you  !  Have 
you  nothing  to  spare  for  a  poor  literary  man  like 
myself,  who  has  made  all  he  could  out  of  the  hulk 
of  a  poor  old  Philippine  galleon  on  Pacific  seas  ? 
Couldn't  you  lend  me  a  Don  or  a  galley-slave  out 
of  that  delightful  crew  of  solemn  lunatics  ?  And 
yet  how  splendid  are  those  last  orders  of  the  Duke  ! 
With  what  a  swan-like  song  they  sailed  away  !  " 

The  letter  from  Medina  Sidonia  to  Philip,  which 
reminded  both  Froude  and  Bret  Harte  of  Sancho 
Panza,  is  too  delicious  not  to  be  given  in  full. 

"My  health  is  bad,  and  from  my  small  experience 


196  LIFE   OF    FROUDE 

of  the  water  I  know  that  I  am  always  sea-sick. 
I  have  no  money  which  I  can  spare,  I  owe  a 
million  ducats,  and  I  have  not  a  real  to  spend  on 
my  outfit.  The  expedition  is  on  such  a  scale,  and 
the  object  is  of  such  high  importance,  that  the 
person  at  the  head  of  it  ought  to  understand 
navigation  and  sea-fighting,  and  I  know  nothing  of 
either.  I  have  not  one  of  those  essential  qualifica- 
tions. I  have  no  acquaintance  among  the  officers 
who  are  to  serve  under  me.  Santa  Cruz  had 
information  about  the  state  of  things  in  England  ; 
I  have  none.  Were  I  competent  otherwise,  I 
should  have  to  act  in  the  dark  by  the  opinion  of 
others,  and  I  cannot  tell  to  whom  I  may  trust. 
Th  Adelantado  of  Castile  would  do  better  than  I. 
Our  Lord  would  help  him,  for  he  is  a  good  Christian, 
and  has  fought  in  several  battles.  If  you  send  me, 
depend  upon  it,  I  shall  have  a  bad  account  to 
render  of  my  trust."  1 

"  Those  last  orders  of  the  Duke  " — the  same 
Duke,  by  the  way — are  "  splendid  "  enough  of 
their  kind. 

"  From  highest  to  lowest  you  are  to  understand 
the  object  of  our  expedition,  which  is  to  recover 
countries  to  the  Church  now  oppressed  by  the 
enemies  of  the  true  faith.  I  therefore  beseech 
you  to  remember  your  calling,  so  that  God  may 
be  with  us  in  what  we  do.  I  charge  you,  one  and 
all,  to  abstain  from  profane  oaths,  dishonouring 
to  the  names  of  our  Lord,  our  Lady,  and  the 

1  Spanish  Story  of  the  Armada,  pp.  19,  20. 


FROUDE    AND    FREEMAN  197 

Saints.  All  personal  quarrels  are  to  be  suspended 
while  the  expedition  lasts,  and  for  a  month  after 
it  is  completed.  Neglect  of  this  will  be  held  as 
treason.  Each  morning  at  sunrise  the  ship-boys, 
according  to  custom,  will  sing  '  Good  Morrow ' 
at  the  foot  of  the  mainmast,  and  at  sunset  the 
'  Ave  Maria.'  Since  bad  weather  may  interrupt 
the  communications  the  watchword  is  laid  down 
for  each  day  in  the  week  :  Sunday,  Jesus  ;  the 
days  succeeding,  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  Holy  Trinity, 
Santiago,  the  Angels,  All  Saints,  and  Our  Lady."  l 

"  God  and  one,"  it  has  been  said,  "  make  a 
majority."  But  in  this  case  God  was  not  on  the 
side  of  the  pious  and  incompetent  Medina  Sidonia. 

It  was  not  till  this  same  year  1892,  after  Free- 
man's death,  that  the  "  Calendar  of  Letters  and 
State  Papers  relative  to  English  affairs  preserved 
principally  in  the  Archives  of  Simancas  "  began 
to  be  published  in  England  by  the  Master  of 
the  Rolls.  Translated  by  an  eminent  scholar,  Mr. 
Martin  Hume,  and  printed  in  a  book,  they  could 
have  been  read  by  Freeman  himself,  and  can  be 
read  by  any  one  who  cares  to  undertake  the  task. 
They  will  at  least  give  some  idea  of  the  enormous 
labour  undergone  by  Froude  in  his  several  sojourns 
at  Simancas.  I  cannot  profess  to  have  instituted 
a  systematic  comparison,  but  a  few  specimens 
selected  at  random  show  that  Froude  summarised 
fairly  the  documents  with  which  he  dealt.  That 
there  should  be  some  discrepancies  was  inevitable. 

1  Spanish  Story  of  the  Armada,  pp.  27,  28. 


198  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

Philip  II.  wrote  a  remarkably  bad  hand,  and  his 
Ambassadors  were  not  chosen  for  their  penman- 
ship. The  most  striking  fact  in  the  case 
is  that  Mr.  Hume  has  derived  assistance  from 
Froude  in  the  performance  of  his  own  duties.  "  I 
have,"  he  writes  in  his  Introduction,  "  very  care- 
fully compared  the  Spanish  text  when  doubtful 
with  Mr.  Froude' s  extracts  and  copies  and  with 
transcripts  of  many  of  the  letters  in  the  British 
Museum."  Nothing  could  give  a  better  idea  than 
this  sentence  of  the  difficulties  which  Froude  had 
to  surmount,  or  of  the  fidelity  with  which  he 
surmounted  them.  He  had  not  only  achieved 
his  own  object :  he  also  smoothed  the  path  of 
future  labourers  in  the  same  field.  It  was 
the  inaccessibility  of  the  records  at  Simancas 
that  enabled  Freeman  to  accuse  Froude  of  not 
correctly  transcribing  or  abstracting  manuscripts. 
Like  other  people,  he  made  mistakes;  but  mis- 
takes have  to  be  weighed  as  well  as  counted,  and 
even  in  enumerating  Froude' s  we  must  always 
remember  that  he  used  more  original  matter  than 
any  other  modern  historian. 


CHAPTER     VI 

IRELAND  AND   AMERICA 

T7ROUDE  had  made  history  the  business  of 
his  life,  and  he  had  no  sooner  completed 
his  History  of  England  than  he  turned  his  attention 
to  the  sister  people.  The  Irish  chapters  in  his 
great  book  had  been  picked  out  by  hostile  critics 
as  especially  good,  and  in  them  he  had  strongly 
condemned  the  cruel  misgovernment  of  an  English- 
man otherwise  so  humane  as  Essex.  While  he  was 
in  Ireland  he  had  examined  large  stores  of  material 
in  Dublin,  which  he  compared  with  documents  at 
the  Record  Office  in  London,  and  he  contemplated 
early  in  1871,  if  not  before,  a  book  on  Irish  history. 
For  this  task  he  was  not  altogether  well  qualified. 
The  religion  of  Celtic  Ireland  was  repugnant  to 
him,  and  he  never  thoroughly  understood  it.  In 
religious  matters  Froude  could  not  be  neutral. 
Where  Catholic  and  Protestant  came  into  conflict, 
he  took  instinctively,  almost  involuntarily,  the 
Protestant  side.  In  the  England  of  the  sixteenth 
century  the  Protestant  side  was  the  side  of 
England.  In  Ireland  the  case  was  reversed,  and 

the  spirit  of  Catholicism  was  identical  with  the 

199 


200  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

spirit  of  nationality.     Irish  Catholics  to  this  day 
associate  Protestantism  with  the  sack  of  Drogheda 
and  Wexford,  with  the  detested  memory  of  Oliver 
Cromwell.     To  Froude,  as  to  Carlyle,  Cromwell  was 
the  minister  of  divine  vengeance  upon  murderous 
and  idolatrous  Papists.     His  liking  for  the  Irish, 
though  perfectly  genuine,  was  accompanied  with 
an  underlying  contempt  which  is  more  offensive  to 
the  objects  of  it  than  the  hatred  of  an  open  foe. 
He  regarded  them  as  a  race  unfit  for  self-govern- 
ment,   who   had   proved   their   unworthiness   of 
freedom  by  not  winning   it  with  the  sword.     If 
they  had  not  quarrelled  among  themselves,  and 
betrayed  one  another,  they  would  have  established 
their  right  to  independence ;  or,  if  there  had  been 
still  an  Act  of  Union,  they  could  have  come  in, 
as  the  Scots  came,  on  their  own  terms.     For  an 
Englishman  to  write  the  history  of  Ireland  without 
prejudice    he    must    be    either    a    cosmopolitan 
philosopher,  or  a  passionless  recluse.     Froude  was 
an  ardent  patriot,  and  his  early  studies  in  hagiology 
had  led  him  to  the  conclusion,  not  now  accepted, 
that  St.  Patrick  never  existed  at  all.     His  scepti- 
cism about  St.  Patrick  might  have  been  forgiven 
to  a  man  who  had  probably  not  much  belief  in 
St.  George.     But  Froude  could  not  help  running 
amok  at  all  the  popular  heroes  of  Ireland.     In  the 
first  of  his  two  papers  describing  a  fortnight  in 
Kerry  he  went  out  of  his  way  to  depreciate  the 
fame  of  Daniel  O'Connell.     "  Ireland,"  he  wrote, 
(<  has  ceased  to  care  for  him.     His  fame  blazed 


IRELAND   AND   AMERICA          201 

like  a  straw  bonfire,  and  has  left  behind  it  scarce 
a  shovelful  of  ashes.  Never  any  public  man 
had  it  in  his  power  to  do  so  much  good  for  his 
country,  nor  was  there  ever  one  who  accomplished 
so  little."  : 

That  O'Connell  wasted  much  time  in  clamour- 
ing for  Repeal  is  perfectly  true.  But  he  was  as 
much  the  author  of  Catholic  Emancipation  as 
Cobden  was  the  author  of  Free  Trade,  and  that 
fact  alone  should  have  debarred  Froude  from  the 
use  of  this  extravagant  language.  For  though 
an  article  in  Fraser's  Magazine  is  a  very  different 
thing  from  a  serious  history,  print  imposes  some 
obligations,  and  even  two  or  three  casual  sentences 
may  show  the  bent  of  a  man's  mind.  Whatever 
Froude  wrote  on  Ireland,  or  on  anything  else,  was 
sure  to  be  widely  read,  and  to  affect,  for  good 
or  for  evil,  the  opinion  of  the  British  public.  It 
was  therefore  peculiarly  incumbent  on  him  not 
to  flatter  English  pride  by  wounding  Irish  self- 
respect. 

While  Froude  was  writing  his  English  in  Ireland 
he  received  an  invitation  to  give  a  series  of  lectures 
in  the  United  States.  "  The  Yankees,"  he  says 
to  Skelton,2  "  have  written  to  me  about  going  over 
to  lecture  to  them.  I  am  strongly  tempted  ;  but 
I  could  not  tell  the  truth  about  Ireland  without 
reflecting  in  a  good  many  ways  on  my  own  country. 
I  don't  fancy  doing  that,  however  justly,  to  amuse 

1  Short  Studies,  vol.  ii.  p.  241. 
*  Table  Talk  of  Shirley,  p.   149. 


202  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

Jonathan."  These  words  certainly  do  not  show 
implacable  bitterness  against  Ireland.  Brought 
face  to  face  with  responsibility,  Froude  always 
felt  the  weight  of  it,  and  he  was  never  consciously 
unfair.  He  was  under  a  strong  sense  of  obligation, 
which  he  felt  bound  to  fulfil.  It  is  impossible 
not  to  admire  the  chivalrous  and  intrepid  spirit 
with  which  he  undertook  singlehanded  to  justify 
the  conduct  of  his  countrymen  before  the  American 
people,  and  to  persuade  them  that  England  had 
provocation  for  her  treatment  of  Ireland.  Once 
convinced  that  his  cause  was  righteous,  he  never 
flinched.  He  believed  that  false  views  of  the 
Irish  question  prevailed  in  America,  and  that 
he  could  set  them  right.  He  did  not  alto- 
gether underrate  the  magnitude  of  the  enter- 
prise. "  I  go  like  an  Arab  of  the  desert,"  he 
wrote  to  Skelton  a  little  later :  "  my  hand 
will  be  against  every  man,  and  therefore  every 
man's  hand  will  be  against  me."  l  A  belief  in 
Ireland's  wrongs  was  part  of  the  American  creed, 
like  the  faithlessness  of  Charles  II.  and  the 
tyranny  of  George  III.  Irish  Americans  had 
enormous  influence  at  elections,  in  Congress,  and 
in  the  newspapers.  Released  Fenians,  O'Donovan 
Rossa  among  them,  had  been  spreading  what 
they  called  the  light,  and  their  own  country- 
men at  all  events  believed  what  they  said.  The 
American  people  as  a  whole  were  not  unfriendly 
to  England.  The  Alabama  Arbitration  and  the 

1  Table  Talk  of  Shirley,  p.  15 1 . 


IRELAND    AND    AMERICA  203 

Geneva  Award  had  destroyed  the  ill  feeling  that 
remained  after  the  fall  of  Richmond.  But  it  was 
not  worth  the  while  of  any  American  politician 
to  alienate  the  Irish  vote,  and  most  Americans 
honestly  thought,  not  without  reason,  that  the 
policy  of  England  in  Ireland  had  been  abomin- 
able. To  let  sleeping  dogs  lie  might  be  wise. 
Once  they  were  unchained,  no  American  hand 
would  help  to  chain  them  up  again.  Froude, 
however,  conceived  that  circumstances  were  un- 
usually favourable.  The  Irish  Church  had  been 
disestablished,  and  the  Fenian  prisoners  had 
been  set  free.  The  Irish  Land  Act  of  1870  had 
recognised  the  Irish  tenant's  right  to  a  partnership 
in  the  soil.  Although  Froude  had  no  sympathy, 
ecclesiastical  or  political,  with  Gladstone,  he  did 
think  that  the  Land  Act  was  a  just  and  beneficent 
measure  from  which  good  would  come.  In  the  firm 
belief  that  he  could  vindicate  the  statesmanship 
of  his  own  country  before  American  audiences 
without  sacrificing  the  paramount  claims  of  truth 
and  justice,  he  accepted  the  invitation. 

After  a  summer  cruise  in  a  big  schooner  with 
his  friend  Lord  Ducie,  whose  hospitality  at  sea 
he  often  in  coming  years  enjoyed,  Froude  sailed 
from  Liverpool  in  the  Russia  at  the  end  of  Sep- 
tember, 1872,  with  the  distinguished  physicist 
John  Tyndall.  He  was  a  good  sailor,  and  loved 
a  voyage.  In  his  first  letter  to  his  wife  from 
American  soil  he  describes  a  storm  with  the  delight 
of  a  schoolboy. 


204  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

"  On  Saturday  morning  it  blew  so  hard  that  it 
was  scarcely  possible  to  stand  on  deck.  The  wind 
and  waves  dead  ahead,  and  the  whole  power  of 
the  engines  only  just  able  to  move  the  ship  against 
it.  It  was  the  grandest  sight  I  ever  witnessed — 
the  splendid  Russia,  steady  as  if  she  were  on 
a  railway,  holding  her  straight  course  without 
yielding  one  point  to  the  sea — up  the  long  hill- 
sides of  the  waves  and  down  into  the  troughs — 
the  crests  of  the  sea  all  round  as  far  as  the  eye 
could  reach  in  one  wild  whirl  of  foam  and  spray. 
It  was  worth  coming  into  the  Atlantic  to  see — with 
the  sense  all  the  time  of  perfect  security." 

Froude's  visit  was  in  one  respect  well  timed. 
President  Grant  had  just  been  assured  of  his  second 
term,  and  even  politicians  had  leisure  to  think  of 
their  famous  guest.  He  was  at  once  invited  to 
a  great  banquet  in  New  York,  and  found  himself 
lodged  with  sumptuous  hospitality  in  a  luxurious 
hotel  at  the  expense  of  the  Bureau  which  had 
organised  the  lectures.  One  newspaper  quaintly 
described  him  as  "  looking  like  a  Scotch  farmer, 
with  an  open  frank  face  and  calm  mild  eyes."  His 
History  was  well  known,  for  the  Scribners  had  sold 
a  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  copies.  His  opinions 
were  of  course  freely  invited,  and  he  did  not  hesitate 
to  give  them.  l<  I  talk  much  Toryism  to  them 
all,  and  ridicule  the  idea  of  England's  decay,  or 
of  our  being  in  any  danger  of  revolution  ;  and  with 
Colonies  and  India  and  Commerce,  etc.,  I  insist 
that  we  are  just  as  big  as  they  are,  and  have  just 


IRELAND    AND    AMERICA  205 

as  large  a  future  before  us."  Both  Froude  and 
his  hosts  might  have  remembered  with  advantage 
Disraeli's  fine  saying  that  great  nations  are  those 
which  produce  great  men.  But  the  sensual 
idolatry  of  mere  size  is  almost  equally  common  on 
both  sides  of  the  Atlantic. 

The  banquet  was  given  by  Froude' s  American 
publishers,  the  Scribners,  and  his  old  acquaintance 
Emerson  was  one  of  the  company.  Another  was 
a  popular  clergyman,  Henry  Ward  Beecher,  and 
a  third  was  the  present  Ambassador  of  the  United 
States  in  London,  Mr.  Whitelaw  Reid.  In  his 
speech  Froude  referred  to  the  object  of  his  visit. 
He  had  heard  at  home  that  "  one  of  the  most 
prominent  Fenian  leaders,"  O' Donovan  Rossa, 
"  was  making  a  tour  in  the  United  States,  dilating 
upon  English  tyranny  and  the  wrongs  of  Ireland." 
That  Froude  should  cross  the  seas  to  confute 
O' Donovan  Rossa  must  have  struck  the  audience 
as  scarcely  credible,  until  he  explained  his  mission, 
for  as  such  he  regarded  it,  by  asserting  that  "  the 
judgment  of  America  has  more  weight  in  Ireland 
than  twenty  batteries  of  English  cannon."  When 
the  Irish  had  the  management  of  their  own 
affairs,  he  continued,  the  result  was  universal 
misery.  They  could  not  govern  themselves  in  the 
sixteenth  century ;  therefore  they  could  not  govern 
themselves  in  the  nineteenth.  If  American  opinion 
would  only  tell  the  Irish  that  they  had  no  longer 
any  grievances  which  legislation  could  redress,  the 
Irish  would  believe  it,  and  all  would  be  well. 


206  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

Though  courteously  treated  as  a  representative 
Englishman,  Froude  had  of  course  no  official  posi- 
tion, and  he  hoped  that  as  a  private  individual  his 
voice  might  be  heard.  But,  while  there  were  thou- 
sands of  native  Americans  who  had  no  love  for 
their  Irish  fellow-citizens,  there  were  very  few  in- 
deed who  cared  to  take  up  England's  case  against 
Ireland.  The  Democratic  party  were  inclined 
to  sympathise  with  Home  Rule  as  being  a  mild 
form  of  Secession,  and  the  Republican  party  did 
not  see  why  Ireland  should  be  refused  the  quali- 
fied independence  enjoyed  by  every  State  of  the 
Union.  In  these  unfavourable  circumstances 
Froude  delivered  his  first  lecture.  He  made  a 
good  point  when  he  described  the  Irish  peasant 
in  Munster  or  Connaught  looking  to  America 
as  his  natural  protector.  "  There  is  not  a 
lad,"  he  exclaimed,  "  in  an  Irish  national  school 
who  does  not  pore  over  the  maps  of  the  States 
which  hang  on  the  walls,  gaze  on  them  with 
admiration  and  hope,  and  count  the  years  till  he 
too  shall  set  his  foot  in  those  famous  cities  which 
float  before  his  imagination  like  the  gardens  of 
Aladdin."  Nevertheless  he  asked  his  hearers  and 
readers  to  take  it  from  him  that  Ireland  had  no 
longer  any  good  ground  of  complaint  against  the 
Parliament  of  the  United  Kingdom.  Independence 
she  could  not  have,  and  that  not  because  the 
interests  of  Great  Britain  forbade  it,  which  would 
have  been  an  intelligible  argument,  but  because 
she  was  unfit  for  it  herself. 


IRELAND    AND    AMERICA  207 

"  If  I  were  to  sum  up  in  one  sentence  the  secret 
of  Ireland's  misfortunes,  I  should  say  it  lay  in 
this  :  that  while  from  the  first  she  has  resisted 
England,  complained  of  England,  appealed  to 
heaven  and  earth  against  the  wrongs  which 
England  has  inflicted  on  her,  she  has  ever  invited 
others  to  help  her,  and  has  never  herself  made  an 
effective  fight  for  her  own  rights.  ...  A  majority 
of  hustings  votes  might  be  found  for  a  separation. 
The  majority  would  be  less  considerable  if  in- 
stead of  a  voting-paper  they  were  called  to  handle 
a  rifle." 

To  tell  Irishmen  that  they  could  obtain  liberty 
by  fighting  for  it,  and  would  never  get  it  in  any 
other  way,  was  not  likely  to  conciliate  them,  or 
to  promote  the  cause  of  peace.  Froude's  appeal 
to  American  opinion,  however,  was  more  practical. 

"  The  Irishman  requires  to  be  ruled,  but  ruled 
as  all  men  ought  to  be,  by  the  laws  of  right  and 
wrong,  laws  which  shall  defend  the  weak  from  the 
strong  and  the  poor  from  the  rich.  When  the 
poor  peasant  is  secured  the  reward  of  his  own 
labour,  and  is  no  longer  driven  to  the  blunderbuss 
to  save  himself  and  his  family  from  legalised 
robbery,  if  he  prove  incorrigible  then,  I  will  give 
him  up.  But  the  experiment  remains  to  be 
made." 

An  example  had  been  set  by  Gladstone  in  the 
Land  Act,  and  that  was  the  path  which  further 
legislation  ought  to  follow.  So  far  there  would 
not  be  much  disagreement  between  Froude  and 


208  LIFE   OF    FROUDE 

most  Irish  Americans.  Rack-renting  upon  the 
tenants'  improvements  was  the  bane  of  Irish 
agriculture,  and  the  Act  of  1870  was  precisely 
what  Froude  described  it,  a  partial  antidote. 
Then  the  lecturer  reverted  to  ancient  history,  to 
the  Annals  of  the  Four  Masters,  and  the  Danish 
invasion.  The  audience  found  it  rather  long, 
and  rather  dull,  even  though  Dublin,  Wexford, 
Waterford,  Cork,  and  Limerick  were  all  built  by 
the  Danes.  But  a  foundation  had  to  be  laid,  and 
Froude  felt  bound  also  to  make  it  clear  that  he  did 
not  take  the  old  Whig  view  of  Government  as 
a  necessary  evil,  or  swear  by  the  "  dismal  science" 
of  Adam  Smith. 

He  concluded  his  first  lecture  in  words  which 
at  once  defined  his  position  and  challenged  the 
whole  Irish  race.  "  It  was  not  tyranny,"  he 
cried,  "  but  negligence  ;  it  was  not  the  intrusion 
of  English  authority,  but  the  absence  of  all 
authority  ;  it  was  that  very  leaving  Ireland  to 
herself  which  she  demands  so  passionately  that 
was  the  cause  of  her  wretchedness."  After  that 
it  was  hopeless  to  expect  that  he  would  have  an 
impartial  hearing.  Every  Irishman  understood 
that  the  lecturer  was  an  enemy,  and  was  prepared 
not  to  read  for  instruction,  but  to  look  out  for 
mistakes.  An  article  in  The  New  York  Tribune, 
which  spoke  of  Froude  with  admiration  and 
esteem,  told  him  plainly  enough  how  it  would  be. 
"  We  have  had  historical  lecturers  before,  but 
never  any  who  essayed  with  such  industry, 


IRELAND    AND    AMERICA          209 

learning,  and  eloquence  to  convince  a  nation  that 
its  sympathies  for  half  a  century  at  least  have 
have  been  misplaced.  .  .  .  The  thesis  which  he 
only  partly  set  out  for  the  night — that  the  misfor- 
tunes of  Ireland  are  rather  due  to  the  congenital 
qualities  of  the  race  than  to  wrongs  inflicted  by 
their  conquerors — will  excite  earnest  and  perhaps 
bitter  controversy."  This  prediction  was  abun- 
dantly fulfilled,  and  the  controversy  spoiled  the 
tour.  A  friendly  and  sympathetic  journalist 
questioned  Froude' s  "wisdom  in  coming  before  our 
people  with  this  course  of  lectures  on  Irish  history. 
.  .  .  We  do  not  care  for  the  domestic  troubles  of 
other  nations,  and  it  is  a  piece  of  impertinence  to 
thrust  them  upon  our  attention.  Mr.  Froude 
knows  perfectly  well  that  England  would  resent, 
and  rightfully,  the  least  interference  on  our  part 
with  her  Irish  policy  or  her  Irish  subjects.' * 

In  this  criticism  there  is  a  large  amount  of 
common  sense,  and  Froude  would  have  done  well  to 
think  of  it  before.  He  was  not,  however,  a  man 
to  be  put  down  by  clamour ;  he  was  sustained 
by  the  fervour  of  his  convictions,  and  it  was  too 
late  for  remonstrance.  His  lectures  had  all  been 
carefully  prepared,  and  he  went  steadily  on  with 
them.  The  unusual  charge  of  dullness,  which  had 
been  made  against  some  passages  in  his  opening 
discourse,  was  never  made  again.  The  lectures 
became  a  leading  topic  of  conversation,  and  a 
subject  of  fierce  attack.  Without  fear,  and  in 
defiance  of  his  critics,  he  dashed  into  the  reign  of 

3310  14 


210  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

Henry  VIII.,  "  the  English  Blue  Beard,  whom  I 
have  been  accused  of  attempting  to  whitewash." 
"  I  have  no  particular  veneration  for  kings,"  he 
said.  "  The  English  Liturgy  speaks  of  them 
officially  as  most  religious  and  gracious.  They 
have  been,  I  suppose,  as  religious  and  gracious  as 
other  men,  neither  more  nor  less.  The  chief  differ- 
ence is  that  we  know  more  of  kings  than  we  know 
of  other  men."  Henry  had  a  short  way  with 
absentees.  He  took  away  their  Irish  estates, 
"  and  gave  them  to  others  who  would  reside  and 
attend  to  their  work.  It  would  have  been  con- 
fiscation doubtless,"  beyond  the  power  of  an 
American  Congress,  though  not  of  a  British 
Parliament.  "If  in  later  times  there  had  been 
more  such  confiscations,  Ireland  would  not  have 
been  the  worse  for  it."  Here,  then,  Froude  was 
on  the  side  of  the  Irish.  Here,  as  always,  he  was 
under  the  influence  of  Carlyle.  His  ideal  form  of 
government  was  an  enlightened  despotism,  with 
a  ruler  drawn  after  the  pattern  of  children's  story- 
books, who  would  punish  the  wicked  and  reward 
the  good.  Froude  never  consciously  defended 
injustice,  or  tampered  with  the  truth.  His  faults 
were  of  the  opposite  kind.  He  could  not  help 
speaking  out  the  whole  truth  as  it  appeared  to 
him,  without  regard  for  time,  place,  or  expediency. 
If  he  could  have  defended  England  without 
attacking  Ireland,  all  would  have  been  well,  but 
he  could  not  do  it.  For  his  defence  of  England, 
stated  simply,  was  that  Ireland  had  always  been, 


IRELAND    AND    AMERICA  211 

and  still  remained,  incapable  of  managing  her  own 
affairs.  "  Free  nations,  gentlemen,  are  not  made 
by  playing  at  insurrection.  If  Ireland  desires  to 
be  a  nation,  she  must  learn  not  merely  to  shout 
for  liberty,  but  to  fight  for  it "  against  a  bigger 
nation  with  a  standing  army  in  which  many 
Irishmen  were  enlisted.  The  Irish  are  a  sensitive 
as  well  as  a  generous  race;  and  they  feel  taunts 
as  much  as  more  substantial  wrongs.  When  the 
first  British  statesman  of  his  time,  not  a  Roman 
Catholic,  nor,  as  the  Irish  would  have  said,  a 
Catholic  at  all,  had  denounced  the  upas,  or  poison, 
tree  of  Protestant  ascendency,  and  had  cut  off  its 
two  principal  branches,  Froude  wasted  his  breath 
in  telling  the  American  Irish,  or  the  American 
people,  that  Gladstone  did  not  know  what  he  was 
talking  about.  The  Irish  Church  Act,  the  Irish 
Land  Act,  the  release  of  the  Fenians,  appealed  to 
them  as  honest  measures  of  justice  and  concilia- 
tion. There  was  nothing  conciliatory  in  Froude's 
language,  and  they  did  not  think  it  just.  From 
the  purely  historical  point  of  view  he  had  much 
to  say  for  himself,  as,  for  instance  : 

'  The  Papal  cause  in  Europe  in  the  sixteenth 
century,  take  it  for  all  in  all,  was  the  cause  of  stake 
and  gibbet,  inquisition,  dungeons,  and  political 
tyranny.  It  did  not  lose  its  character  because  in 
Ireland  it  assumed  the  accidental  form  of  the 
defence  of  the  freedom  of  opinion." 

Perhaps  not.  Ireland,  for  good  or  for  evil,  was 
connected  with  England,  and  when  England  was 


212  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

at  war  with  the  Pope  she  was  at  war  with  him 
in  Ireland  as  elsewhere.  The  argument,  however, 
is  double-edged.  The  Papal  cause  being  no  longer, 
for  various  reasons,  the  cause  of  stake  and  gibbet, 
how  could  there  be  the  same  ground  for  restricting 
freedom  of  opinion  in  Ireland,  for  passing  Coercion 
Acts,  for  refusing  Home  Rule  ?  As  Froude  himself 
said,  "  Popery  now  has  its  teeth  drawn.  It  can 
bark,  but  it  can  no  longer  bite."  "  The  Irish 
generally,"  he  went  on,  "were  rather  superstitious 
than  religious."  These  are  delicate  distinctions. 
"  The  Bishop  of  Peterborough  must  understand," 
said  John  Bright  on  a  famous  occasion,  "  that  I 
believe  in  holy  earth  as  little  as  he  believes  in 
holy  water."  Elizabeth's  Irish  policy  was  to 
take  advantage  of  local  factions,  and  to  maintain 
English  supremacy  by  setting  them  against  each 
other.  "  The  result  was  hideous.  The  forty-five 
glorious  years  of  Elizabeth  were  to  Ireland  years 
of  unremitting  wretchedness."  Nobody  could 
complain  that  Froude  spared  the  English  Govern- 
ment. If  he  had  been  writing  history,  or  rather 
when  he  was  writing  it,  the  mutual  treachery  of 
the  Irish  could  not  be  passed  over.  "  Alas  and 
shame  for  Ireland,"  said  Froude  in  New  York. 
"Not  then  only,  but  many  times  before  and  after, 
the  same  plan  [offer  of  pardon  to  murderous 
traitors]  was  tried,  and  was  never  known  to  fail. 
Brother  brought  in  the  dripping  head  of  brother, 
son  of  father,  comrade  of  comrade.  I  pardon 
none,  said  an  English  commander,  until  they  have 


IRELAND    AND   AMERICA          213 

imbued  their  hands  in  blood."  The  revival  of 
such  horrors  on  a  public  platform  could  serve  no 
useful  purpose.  They  could  not  be  pleaded  as 
an  apology  for  England,  and  they  inflamed, 
instead  of  soothing,  the  animosities  which  Froude 
professed  himself  anxious  to  allay.  Yet  he  never 
lost  sight  of  justice.  On  Elizabeth  he  had  no 
mercy.  He  made  her  responsible  for  the  slaughter 
of  men,  women,  and  children  by  her  officers, 
for  first  neglecting  her  duties  as  ruler,  and  then 
putting  down  rebellion  by  assassination.  The 
plantation  of  Ulster  by  James  I.,  and  the  ac- 
companying forfeiture  of  Catholic  estates,  he 
defended  on  the  ground  that  only  the  idle  rich  were 
dispossessed.  This  is  of  course  socialism  pure  and 
simple.  James  I.'s  own  excuse  was  that  Tyrone 
and  Tyrconnell,  who  owned  the  greater  part  of 
Ulster  between  them,  had  been  implicated  in  the 
Gunpowder  Plot.  If  they  were,  the  loss  of  their 
lands  was  a  very  mild  penalty  indeed. 

On  the  rebellion  of  1641,  which  led  to  Cromwell's 
terrible  retribution,  Froude  touched  lightly. 
Although  the  number  of  Protestants  who  perished 
in  the  massacre  has  been  exaggerated,  the  attempts 
of  Catholic  historians  to  deny  it,  or  explain  it 
away,  are  futile.  Sir  William  Petty 's  figure  of 
38,000  is  as  well  authenticated  as  any.  Froude 
of  course  justifies  Cromwell  for  putting,  eight 
years  afterwards,  the  garrisons  of  Drogheda  and 
Wexford  to  the  sword.  His  characteristic  in- 
trepidity was  never  more  fully  shown  than  in 


214  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

these  appeals  to  American  opinion  against  the 
Irish  race  and  creed.  Unfortunately  the  practical 
result  of  them  was  the  reverse  of  what  he 
intended.  He  preached  the  gospel  of  force.  Thus 
he  expressed  it  in  reply  to  Cromwell's  critics  : 
"  I  say  frankly,  that  I  believe  the  control  of  human 
things  in  this  world  is  given  to  the  strong,  and 
those  who  cannot  hold  their  own  ground  with  all 
advantage  on  their  side  must  bear  the  conse- 
quences of  their  weakness."  The  Holy  Inquisition 
might  have  used  this  language  in  Italy  or  in 
Spain.  Any  tyrant  might  use  it  at  any  time.  It 
was  denied  in  anticipation  by  an  older  and 
higher  authority  than  Carry le  in  the  words  "  The 
race  is  not  always  to  the  swift,  nor  the  battle  to 
the  strong."  There  is  a  better  morality,  if  indeed 
there  be  a  worse,  than  reverence  for  big  battalions. 

Sceptre  and  crown 

Must  topple  down, 
And  in  the  earth  be  equal  made 
With  the  poor  crooked  scythe  and  spade; 

Only  the  actions  of  the  just 

Smell  sweet  and  blossom  in  their  dust. 

Froude  seldom  did  things  by  halves,  and  his 
apology  for  Cromwell  is  not  half-hearted.  He 
applauds  the  celebrated  pronouncement,  "  I 
meddle  with  no  man's  conscience  ;  but  if  you 
mean  by  liberty  of  conscience,  liberty  to  have  the 
mass,  that  will  not  be  suffered  where  the  Parlia- 


IRELAND    AND    AMERICA  215 

ment  of  England  has  power."  A  great  deal  has 
happened  since  Cromwell's  time,  and  the  mass 
is  no  longer  the  symbol  of  intolerance,  if  only 
because  the  Church  of  Rome  has  no  power  to 
persecute.  Cromwell  would  have  had  a  short 
shrift  if  he  had  fallen  into  the  hands  of  mass- 
goers.  To  tolerate  intolerance  is  a  Christian 
duty,  and  therefore  possible  for  an  individual. 
Whether  it  was  possible  for  the  Lord  General  in 
1650  is  a  question  hardly  suited  for  popular 
treatment  on  a  public  platform.  All  that  he  did 
was  right  in  Froude's  eyes,  including  the  prescrip- 
tion of  "  Hell  or  Connaught  "  for  "  the  men  whose 
trade  was  fighting,  who  had  called  themselves 
lords  of  the  soil,"  and  the  abolition  of  the  Irish 
Parliament.  "  I  as  an  Englishman,"  said  Froude, 
"  honour  Cromwell  and  glory  in  him  as  the  greatest 
statesman  and  soldier  our  race  has  produced. 
In  the  matter  we  have  now  in  hand  I  consider 
him  to  have  been  the  best  friend,  in  the  best 
sense,  to  all  that  was  good  in  Ireland."  This 
is  of  course  an  opinion  which  can  honestly  be 
held.  But  to  the  Irish  race  all  over  the  world 
such  language  is  an  irritating  defiance,  and  they 
simply  would  not  listen  to  any  man  who  used  it. 

The  expulsion  of  Presbyterians  under  Charles  II. 
was  foolish  as  well  as  cruel,  for  it  deprived  the 
English  Government  in  Ireland  of  their  best 
friends,  and  supplied  the  American  colonies  with 
some  of  their  staunchest  soldiers  in  the  War  of 
Independence.  Enough  were  left,  however,  to 


216  LIFE   OF    FROUDE 

immortalise  the  siege  of  Deny,  while  the  native 
Irish  failed  to  distinguish  themselves,  or,  in  plain 
English,  ran  away,  at  the  Battle  of  the  Boyne, 
and  the  defeat  of  James  II.  was  recognised  by  the 
Treaty  of  Limerick.  An  exclusively  Protestant 
Parliament  was  accompanied  by  such  toleration 
as  the  Catholics  had  enjoyed  under  Charles  II. 
The  infamous  law  against  the  Irish  trade  in  wool 
and  the  episcopal  persecution  of  Nonconformists 
were  condemned  in  just  and  forcible  terms  by 
Froude.  Episcopal  shortcomings  seldom  escaped 
his  vigilant  eye.  "  I  believe,"  he  said,  "  Bishops 
have  produced  more  mischief  in  this  world  than 
any  class  of  officials  that  have  ever  been  invented." 
The  petition  of  the  Irish  Parliament  for  union  with 
England  in  1703  was  refused,  madly  refused, 
Froude  thought;  Protestant  Dissenters  were  treated 
as  harshly  as  Catholics,  and  the  commercial 
regulations  of  the  eighteenth  century  were  such 
that  smuggling  thrived  better  than  any  other  trade. 
The  country  was  pillaged  by  absent  landlords, 
and  "  the  mere  hint  of  an  absentee  tax  was  suffi- 
cient to  throw  the  younger  Pitt  into  convulsions." 
The  Irish  Protestant  Bishops  provoked  the  savage 
satire  of  Swift,  who  doubted  not  that  excellent 
men  had  been  appointed,  and  only  deplored  that 
they  should  be  personated  by  scoundrels  who  had 
murdered  them  on  Hounslow  Heath. 

These  lectures  stung  the  Irish  to  the  quick,  and 
gave  much  embarrassment  to  Froude' s  American 
friends.  The  Irish  found  a  powerful  champion 


IRELAND    AND    AMERICA  217 

in  Father  Burke,  the  Dominican  friar,  who  had 
been  a  popular  preacher  at  Rome,  and  with  an 
audience  of  his  own  Catholic  countrymen  was 
irresistible.  Burke  was  not  a  well  informed  man, 
and  his  knowledge  of  history  was  derived  from 
Catholic  handbooks.  But  the  occasion  did  not 
call  for  dry  facts.  Froude  had  not  been 
passionless,  and  what  the  Irish  wanted  in  reply 
was  the  rhetorical  eloquence  which  to  the  Father 
was  second  nature.  Burke,  however,  had  the 
good  taste  and  good  sense  to  acknowledge  that 
Froude  suffered  from  nothing  worse  than  the 
invincible  prejudice  which  all  Catholics  attribute 
to  all  Protestants.  As  a  Protestant  and  an 
Englishman,  Froude  could  not  be  expected  to 
give  such  a  history  of  Ireland  as  would  be  agreeable 
to  Irishmen.  "  Yet  to  the  honour  of  this  learned 
gentleman  be  it  said  that  he  frankly  avows  the 
injuries  which  have  been  done,  and  that  he  comes 
nearer  than  any  man  whom  I  have  ever  heard 
to  the  real  root  of  the  remedy  to  be  applied  to 
these  evils."  When  his  handling  of  documentary 
evidence  was  criticised,  Froude  repeated  his 
challenge  to  the  editor  of  The  Saturday  Review, 
which  had  never  been  taken  up,  and  on  that  point 
the  American  sense  of  fair  play_  gave  judgment 
in  his  favour.  But  how  was  public  opinion  to 
pronounce  upon  such  a  subject  as  the  alleged 
Bull  of  Adrian  II.,  granting  Ireland  to  Henry  II. 
of  England  ?  The  Bull  was  not  in  existence,  and 
Burke  boldly  denied  that  it  had  ever  existed  at 


218  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

all.  Froude  maintained  that  its  existence  and 
its  nature  were  proved  by  later  Bulls  of  succeeding 
Popes.  The  matter  had  no  interest  for  Protestants, 
and  the  American  press  regarded  it  as  a  bore. 
Burke  had  more  success  with  the  rebellion  of  1641, 
and  the  Cromwellian  massacres  of  1649.  Such 
topics  cannot  be  exhaustively  treated  in  part  of 
a  single  lecture,  and  Burke  could  not  be  expected 
to  put  the  slaughter  of  true  believers  on  a  level 
with  irregular  justice  roughly  wreaked  upon 
heretics.  The  combat  was  not  so  much  unequal 
as  impossible.  There  was  no  common  ground. 
Froude  could  be  fair  to  an  eminent  Irishman, 
especially  if  he  were  a  Protestant.  His  panegyric 
on  Grattan  deserves  to  be  quoted  alike  for  its 
eloquence  and  its  justice.  "  In  those  singular 
labyrinths  of  intrigue  and  treachery,"  meaning 
the  secret  correspondence  at  the  Castle,  "  I  have 
found  Irishmen  whose  names  stand  fair  enough 
in  patriotic  history  concerned  in  transactions  that 
show  them  knaves  and  scoundrels ;  but  I  never 
found  stain  nor  shadow  of  stain  on  the  reputation 
of  Henry  Grattan.  I  say  nothing  of  the  tempta- 
tions to  which  he  was  exposed.  There  were  no 
honours  with  which  England  would  not  have 
decorated  him  ;  there  was  no  price  so  high  that 
England  would  not  have  paid  to  have  silenced  or 
subsidised  him.  He  was  one  of  those  perfectly 
disinterested  men  who  do  not  feel  temptations  of 
this  kind.  They  passed  by  him  and  over  him 
without  giving  him  even  the  pains  to  turn  his  back 


IRELAND    AND   AMERICA  219 

on  them.  In  every  step  of  his  life  he  was  governed 
simply  and  fairly  by  what  he  conceived  to  be  the 
interest  of  his  country."  Grattan's  Parliament, 
as  we  all  know,  nearly  perished  in  a  dispute  about 
the  Regency,  and  finally  disappeared  after  the 
rebellion  of  1798.  It  gave  the  Catholics  votes 
in  1793,  though  no  Catholic  ever  sat  within  its 
walls.  Grattan,  according  to  Froude,  was  led 
astray  by  the  "  delirium  of  nationality,"  and  the 
true  Irish  statesman  of  his  time  was  Chancellor 
Fitzgibbon,  Lord  Clare,  whose  name  is  only  less 
abhorred  by  Irish  Nationalists  than  Cromwell's 
own.  Americans  did  not  think  nationality  a 
delirium,  and  their  ideal  of  statesmanship  was  not 
represented  by  Lord  Clare. 

The  fifth  and  last  of  Froude' s  American  lectures 
was  reprinted  in  Short  Studies  with  the  title  of 
"  Ireland  since  the  Union."  *  It  has  a  closer  bearing 
upon  current  politics  than  the  others,  and  it  runs 
counter  to  American  as  well  as  to  Irish  sentiment. 
"  Suppose  in  any  community  two-thirds  who  are 
cowards  vote  one  way,  and  the  remaining  third 
will  not  only  vote,  but  fight  the  other  way." 
The  argument  has  often  been  used  against 
woman's  suffrage.  One  obvious  answer  is  that 
women,  like  men,  would  vote  on  different  sides. 
In  a  community  where  two-thirds  of  the  adult 
male  population  were  cowards  problems  of 
government  would  doubtless  assume  a  secondary 
importance,  and  that  there  are  limits  to  the 

1  Vol.  ii.  pp.  515-598. 


220  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

power    of    majorities    no   sane  Constitutionalist 
denies. 

Short  of  making  Carlyle  Dictator  of  the 
Universe,  Froude  suggested  no  alternative  to  the 
ballot-box  of  civilised  life.  This  last  lecture, 
however,  is  chiefly  remarkable  for  the  rare  tribute 
which  it  pays  to  the  services  of  the  Catholic  priest- 
hood. Father  Burke  himself  must  have  been 
melted  when  he  read,  "  Ireland  is  one  of  the 
poorest  countries  in  Europe.  There  is  less  theft, 
less  cheating,  less  house-breaking,  less  robbery 
of  all  sorts,  than  in  any  country  of  the  same  size 
in  the  world.  In  the  wild  district  where  I  lived 
we  slept  with  unlocked  door  and  open  windows, 
with  as  much  security  as  if  we  had  been — I  will 
not  say  in  London  or  New  York,  I  should  be  sorry 
to  try  the  experiment  in  either  place  :  I  will  say 
as  if  we  had  been  among  the  saints  in  Paradise. 
In  the  sixteenth  century  the  Irish  were  notoriously 
regardless  of  what  is  technically  morality.  For 
the  last  hundred  years  at  least  impurity  has  been 
almost  unknown  in  Ireland.  And  this  absence  of 
vulgar  crime,  and  this  exceptional  delicacy  and 
modesty  of  character,  are  due  alike,  to  their  ever- 
lasting honour,  to  the  influence  of  the  Catholic 
clergy."  That  is  the  testimony  of  an  opponent, 
and  it  is  emphatic  testimony  indeed.  To  O'  Connell 
Froude  is  again  conspicuously  unjust,  and  his 
remark  that  "  a  few  attacks  on  handfuls  of  the 
police,  or  the  blowing  in  of  the  walls  of  an  English 
prison  .  .  .  will  not  overturn  an  Empire  "  is  open 


IRELAND   AND   AMERICA  221 

to  the  observation  that  they  disestablished  a 
Church.  When  Froude  came  to  practical  politics, 
he  always  seemed  to  be  "  moving  about  in  worlds 
not  realised."  His  statement  that  national  educa- 
tion in  Ireland  was  the  best  that  existed  in  any 
part  of  the  Empire  almost  takes  one's  breath  away, 
and  the  idea  that  no  Irish  legislature  would  have 
passed  the  Land  Act  is  a  strange  fantasy  indeed. 
Whether  an  Irish  Parliament  could  be  trusted  to 
deal  fairly  by  the  landlords  is  an  open  question. 
That  it  would  fail  to  consider  the  interests  of  the 
tenants  is  unthinkable.  Froude  was  on  much 
firmer  ground  when  he  employed  the  case  of  Pro- 
testant Ulster,  the  Ulster  of  the  Plantation,  as  an 
argument  against  Home  Rule.  Those  Protestants 
would,  he  said,  fight  rather  than  submit  to  a 
Catholic  majority,  and  England  could  not  assent 
to  shooting  them  down.  There  is  only  one  real 
answer  to  this  objection,  and  that  is  that  Protestant 
Ulster  would  do  nothing  of  the  kind.  A  logical 
method  of  reconciling  contradictory  prophecies 
has  never  been  found.  In  1872  Home  Rule  had 
no  support  in  England,  and  even  in  Ireland  the 
electors  were  pretty  equally  divided.  Froude  did 
not  lay  hold  of  the  American  mind,  as  he  might 
have  done,  by  showing  the  inapplicability  of  the 
Federal  System  which  suits  the  United  States  to 
the  circumstances  of  the  United  Kingdom. 

The  impression  made  by  Froude  upon  his 
audiences  in  New  York  is  graphically  described 
by  an  American  reporter. 


222  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

"  Mr.  Froude  improved  very  much  in  delivery  and 
manner  during  this  course  of  lectures.  ...  In  his 
earlier  lectures  his  ways  were  awkward,  his  speech 
was  too  rapid,  and  he  did  not  know  what  in  the 
world  to  do  with  his  hands.     It  was  quite  amusing 
to  see  him  run  them  under  his  coat  tails,  spread 
them  across  his  shirt  front,   stick  them  in  his 
breeches  pockets,  twirl  them  in  the  arm-holes  of 
his  vest,  or  hold  them  behind  his  back.     He  has 
now  found  out  how  to  dispose  of  them  in  a  more 
or  less  natural  way.     His  delivery  is  less  rapid,  his 
voice  better  modulated,  and  his  enunciation  more 
distinct.  .  .  .   One   of    his   most   effective  pecu- 
liarities, in  inviting  the  attention  of  his  hearers, 
is  the  exceeding  earnestness  of  the  manner  of  his 
address.     This  earnestness  is  not  like  that  of  rant. 
It  is  the  result  of  his  own  strong  conviction  and 
his  desire  to  impress  others."     That  is  a  fair  and 
unprejudiced  estimate  of  Froude  as  he  appeared 
to  a  trained  observer  who  took  neither  side  in  the 
dispute.     Many  Irishmen  shook  hands  with  him, 
and  thanked  him  for  his  plain  speaking.     Bret 
Harte  told  him  that  even  those  who  dissented 
most  widely  from  his  opinions  admired  his  "  grit." 
But  politicians  had  to  think  of  the  Irish  vote,  and 
the  proprietors  of  newspapers  could  not  ignore 
their  Catholic  subscribers.     The  priests  worked 
against  him  with  such  effect  that  Mr.  Peabody's 
servants   in   Boston,   who   were   Irish   Catholics, 
threatened  to  leave  their  places  if  Froude  remained 
as  a  guest  in  their  master's  house.     Father  Burke, 


IRELAND    AND    AMERICA  223 

who  had  begun  politely  enough,  became  obstreper- 
ous and  abusive.  Froude's  life  was  in  danger, 
and  he  was  put  under  the  special  protection  of  the 
police.  The  English  newspapers,  except  The  Pall 
Mall  Gazette,  gave  him  no  support,  and  The  Times 
treated  his  enterprise  as  Quixotic.  A  preposterous 
rumour  that  he  received  payment  from  the  British 
Ministry  obtained  circulation  among  respectable 
persons  in  New  York.  He  had  intended  to  visit 
the  Western  States,  but  the  project  was  abandoned 
in  consequence  of  growing  Irish  hostility  which 
made  him  feel  that  further  effort  would  be  use- 
less. It  was  not  that  he  thought  his  arguments 
refuted,  or  capable  of  refutation.  He  had  con- 
sidered them  too  long,  and  too  carefully,  for  that. 
But  the  well  had  been  poisoned.  The  malicious 
imputation  of  bribery  was  caught  up  by  the 
more  credulous  Irish,  and  their  priests  warned 
them  that  they  would  do  wrong  in  listening  to  a 
heretic.  As  for  the  American  people,  they  had 
no  mind  to  take  up  the  quarrel.  It  was  no 
business  of  theirs. 

Some  extracts  from  Froude's  letters  to  his 
wife  will  show  how  much  he  enjoyed  American 
hospitality,  and  how  far  he  appreciated  American 
character.  "  I  was  received  on  Saturday,"  he 
wrote  from  New  York  on  the  4th  of  October,  1872, 
"  as  a  member  of  the  Lotus  Club — the  wits  and 
journalists  of  New  York.  It  was  the  strangest 
scene  I  ever  was  present  at.  They  were  very 
clever — very  witty  at  each  other's  expense,  very 


324  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

complimentary  to  me ;  and,  believe  me,  they 
worked  the  publishers  who  were  present  for  the 
profit  they  were  making  out  of  me."  He  was 
agreeably  surprised  by  the  merchant  princes  of  New 
York.  "  There  is  absolutely  no  vulgarity  about 
them.  They  are  immensely  rich,  but  perfectly 
simple,  and  rather  elaborately  '  religious  '  in  the 
forms  of  their  lives.  A  very  long  grace  is  always 
said  before  dinner.  In  this  and  many  ways  they 
are  totally  unlike  what  I  expected."  Again, 
after  a  description  of  Cornell's  University,  he 
says,  "  There  is  Mr.  Cornell,  who  has  made  all 
this,  living  in  a  little  poky  house  in  a  street  with 
a  couple  of  maids,  his  wife  and  daughters  dressed 
in  the  homeliest  manner.  His  name  will  be 
remembered  for  centuries  as  having  spent  his 
wealth  in  the  very  best  institutions  on  which  a 
country's  prosperity  depends.  Our  people  spend 
their  fortunes  in  buying  great  landed  estates  to 
found  and  perpetuate  their  own  family.  I  wonder 
which  name  will  last  the  longest,  Mr.  Cornell's 
or  Lord  Overstone's."  "  There  is  no  such  thing," 
he  says  elsewhere,  "  as  founding  a  family,  and 
those  who  save  good  fortunes  have  to  give  them 
to  the  public  when  they  die  for  want  of  a  better 
use  to  put  them  to." 

With  sincerely  religious  people,  especially  if  they 
were  Evangelicals,  Froude  felt  deep  sympathy. 
Patronage  of  religion  he  detested,  most  of  all  the 
form  of  it  which  prescribes  religion  for  other  people. 
An  American  philosopher  called,  and  told  him 


IRELAND    AND    AMERICA  225 

that,  having  failed  to  find  a  new  creed,  he  thought 
the  old  superstitions  had  better  be  kept  up,  Popery 
for  choice.  '  This,"  remarks  Froude,  "  is  what  I 
call  want  of  faith.  If  you  can  believe  that  what 
you  are  convinced  is  a  lie  may  nevertheless  exert 
a  wholesome  moral  influence  on  people,  and  that, 
whether  true  or  not,  or  rather  though  certainly 
not  true,  it  is  good  to  be  preserved  and  taken  up 
with,  you  are  to  all  practical  purposes  an 
atheist." 

While  he  was  at  Boston  Froude  saw  a  great 
fire,  and  his  description  of  it  is  hardly  inferior  to 
the  best  things  in  his  best  books.  He  was  stay- 
ing with  George  Peabody,  equally  well  known  in 
England  and  the  United  States  as  a  philanthropist, 
"  one  of  the  sweetest  and  gentlest  of  beings." 
"  As  we  were  sitting  after  dinner,  the  children  said 
there  was  a  fire  somewhere.  They  heard  the  alarm 
bell,  and  saw  a  red  light  in  the  sky.  Presently 
we  saw  flames.  Mr.  Peabody  was  uneasy,  and  I 
walked  out  with  him  to  see.  Between  the  house 
here  and  the  town  lies  the  Common  or  City  Park. 
As  we  crossed  this,  the  signs  became  more  ominous. 
We  made  our  way  into  the  principal  street  through 
the  crowd,  and  then,  looking  down  a  cross  street 
full  of  enormous  warehouses,  saw  both  sides  of 
it  in  flames.  The  streets  were  full  of  steam 
fire-engines,  all  roaring  and  playing,  but  the  houses 
were  so  high  and  large,  and  the  volumes  of  fire 
so  prodigious,  that  their  water-jets  looked  like 
so  many  squirts.  As  we  stood,  we  saw  the  fire 

(2310)  15 


226  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

grow.  Block  caught  after  block.  I  myself  saw 
one  magnificent  store  catch  at  the  lower  windows. 
In  a  few  seconds  the  flame  ran  up  storey  after 
storey,  spouting  out  at  the  different  landings 
as  it  rose.  It  reached  the  roof  with  a  spring, 
and  the  place  was  gone.  There  was  nothing  to 
stop  it.  Our  people  were  sure  that  it  would  be 
another  Chicago.  The  night  was  fine  and  frosty, 
with  a  light  north-easterly  breeze  against  which 
the  fire  was  advancing.  We  stayed  an  hour  or 
two.  There  seemed  no  danger  for  Mr.  Peabody's 
bank.  He  was  evidently,  however,  extremely 
harassed  and  anxious,  as  he  held  the  bonds  of 
innumerable  merchants  whose  property  was  being 
destroyed.  I  thought  I  was  in  his  way,  and  left 
him,  and  came  home  to  tell  the  family  what  was 
going  on.  After  I  left  the  fire  travelled  faster 
than  ever.  Huge  rolls  of  smoke  swelled  up  fold 
after  fold.  The  under  folds  crimson  and  glowing 
yellow  from  the  flames  below,  sparks  flying  up 
like  rocket  stars.  A  petroleum  store  caught, 
and  the  flames  ran  about  in  rivers,  and  above  all 
the  steel  blue  moon  shone  through  the  rents  of 
the  rolling  vapour,  and  the  stars  with  an  intensity 
of  brilliant  calm  such  as  we  never  see  in  England. 
It  was  a  night  to  be  eternally  remembered." 

A  great  many  Irish  families  were  made  homeless 
by  this  fire,  and  Froude  subscribed  seven  hundred 
dollars  for  their  relief,  thereby  encouraging  the 
rumour  that  he  was  in  the  pay  of  the  British 
Minister  whom  he  disliked  and  distrusted  most. 


IRELAND    AND    AMERICA  227 

Fronde's  final  view  of  America  and  Americans 
was  in  some  respects  less  favourable  than  his  first 
impressions.  He  was  struck  by  the  difference 
between  their  public  and  private  treatment  of 
himself,  between  their  conversation  and  the"articles 
in  their  press.  "  From  what  I  see  of  the  Eastern 
States  I  do  not  anticipate  any  very  great  things 
as  likely  to  come  out  of  the  Americans.  Their 
physical  frames  seem  hung  together  rather  than 
organically  grown.  .  .  .  They  are  generous  with 
their  money,  have  much  tenderness  and  quiet 
good  feeling ;  but  the  Anglo-Saxon  power  is 
running  to  seed,  and  I  don't  think  will  revive. 
Puritanism  is  dead,  and  the  collected  sternness 
of  temperament  which  belonged  to  it  is  dead 
also." 

This  language  seems  strange,  written  as  it  was 
only  seven  years  after  the  great  war.  Froude, 
however,  considered  that  there  was  much  hysterical 
passion  in  the  policy  of  the  North,  and  he  shared 
Carlyle's  dislike  of  democratic  institutions.  More- 
over, he  was  disappointed  with  the  result  of  his 
mission.  The  case  seemed  so  clear  to  him  that  he 
could  not  understand  why  it  should  seem  less  clear 
to  others.  He  believed  that  if  the  priests  could 
have  been  driven  out  of  Ireland  by  William  of 
Orange,  the  more  fanatical  Catholics  would  have 
followed  them,  and  Ireland  would  have  become 
prosperous,  contented,  and  loyal.  To  an  American 
Republican  such  ideas  were  as  repugnant  as  they 
were  to  an  Irish  Catholic.  An  American  could 


228  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

understand  the  argument  that  Home  Rule  was 
impracticable,  because  a  Federal  Constitution  did 
not  apply  to  the  circumstances  of  the  United 
Kingdom.  He  would  not  readily  believe  that  the 
Irish  were  by  nature  incapable  of  self-government, 
or  that  Englishmen  must  know  better  what  was 
good  for  them  than  they  knew  themselves.  For 
Cromwell  he  could  make  allowance.  The  Protector 
had  to  deal  with  a  Catholicism  which  would  have 
made  an  end  of  him  and  restored  Charles  II.  But 
times  had  changed.  Catholics  had  abandoned 
persecution,  and  ought  not  to  be  punished  for 
the  sins  of  their  fathers.  The  Irish  did  not  claim, 
as  the  Southern  States  had  claimed,  the  right  to 
secede,  but  to  exercise  the  powers  inherent  in 
every  State  of  the  American  Union. 

Carry le  warmly  approved  of  Froude' s  under- 
taking, and  persisted  in  believing  that  it  had  done 
good  by  forcing  the  American  public  to  see  that 
there  were  two  sides  to  the  historic  question,  an 
English  side  as  well  as  an  Irish  one.  He  was 
so  far  right,  and  with  that  qualified  success  Froude 
had  to  be  content.  His  champion,  whose  opinion 
was  more  to  him  than  any  other,  than  any  number 
of  others,  wrote  to  Mrs.  Froude  on  the  5th 
of  December,  1872 :  "  The  rest  of  the  affair,  all 
that  loud  whirlwind  of  Bully  Burke,  Saturday 
Review  and  Co.,  both  at  home  and  abroad,  I  take 
to  be,  in  essence,  absolutely  nothing ;  and  to 
deserve  from  him  no  more  regard  than  the  barking 
of  dogs,  or  the  braying  of  asses.  He  may  depend 


IRELAND    AND    AMERICA  229 

on  it,  what  he  is  saying  about  Ireland  is  the 
genuine  truth,  or  the  nearest  to  it  that  has  ever 
been  said  by  any  person  whatever ;  and  I  hope 
he  knows  long  ere  this  (if  he  likes  to  consider  it) 
that  the  truth  alone  is  anything,  and  all  the 
circumambient  balderdash  and  whirlwinds  of 
nonsense  tumbling  round  it  are,  and  eternally 
remain,  nothing.  Tell  him  I  have  read  his  book, 
and  know  others  that  have  read  it  with  attention  ; 
and  that  their  and  my  clear  opinion  is  as 
above.  To  myself  there  is  a  ring  in  it  as  of 
clear  steel ;  and  my  prophecy  is  that  all  the 
roaring  blockheads  of  the  world  cannot  prevent 
its  natural  effect  on  human  souls.  Sooner  or  later 
all  persons  will  have  to  believe  it."  Carry le 
seldom  qualified  his  approval,  and  his  earnest 
advocacy  was  to  Froude  a  recompense  beyond 
all  price. 

The  first  volume  of  Froude' s  English  in  Ireland 
in  the  Eighteenth  Century,  to  which  Carlyle  refers, 
had  been  published  at  home  while  the  author  was 
lecturing  on  the  Irish  question  to  the  people  of 
the  United  States.  Like  the  lectures,  on  a  more 
thorough  and  comprehensive  scale,  it  is  a  bold 
indictment  of  the  Irish  nation.  Froude  could 
not  write  without  a  purpose,  nor  forget  that  he 
was  an  Englishman  and  a  Protestant.  Before 
he  had  finished  a  single  chapter  of  his  new  book  he 
had  stated  in  uncompromising  language  his  opinion 
of  the  Irish  race.  "  Passionate  in  everything — 
passionate  in  their  patriotism,  passionate  in  their 


230  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

religion,  passionately  courageous,  passionately 
loyal  and  affectionate — they  are  without  the 
manliness  which  would  give  strength  and  solidity 
to  the  sentimental  part  of  their  dispositions  ;  while 
the  surface  and  show  is  so  seductive  and  winning 
that  only  experience  of  its  instability  can  resist 
its  charm."  l  Such  summary  judgments  are 
seldom  accurate.  Every  one  must  be  acquainted 
with  individual  Irishmen  who  do  not  correspond 
with  Froude's  general  description.  Nor  does 
Froude  always  take  into  account  the  shrewdness, 
the  humour,  the  genius  for  politics,  which  have 
distinguished  Irishmen  throughout  the  world. 
Impressed  with  this  view  of  the  Irish  character, 
he  held  that  forbearance  in  dealing  with  Irish 
rebellions  was  misplaced,  that  Irishmen  respected 
only  an  authority  with  which  they  durst  not 
trifle,  and  that  universal  confiscation  should  have 
followed  the  defeat  of  Shan  O'Neill. 

These,  however,  were  preliminary  matters.  When 
he  came  to  the  eighteenth  century  Froude  had  to 
consider  details,  and  here  his  prejudice  against 
Catholicism  led  him  astray.  In  the  reign  of 
George  II.  acts  of  lawless  violence  were  not 
uncommon  on  this  side  of  the  Channel,  and 
Richardson's  Clarissa  was  read  with  a  credulity 
which  showed  that  abduction  could  be  committed 
without  being  followed  by  punishment.  In  parts 
of  Ireland  it  was  not  an  infrequent  offence,  and 
Froude  collected  some  abominable  cases,  which 

1    Vol.  i,  pp.  21,  22, 


IRELAND    AND    AMERICA  231 

he  described  in  his  picturesque  way.1     As  examples 
of  disregard  for  humanity,  and  contempt  for  law, 
he  was  fully  justified  in  citing  them.     But  he 
endeavoured   to    throw   responsibility    for   these 
outrages  on  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.    "  Young 
gentlemen,"  he  says,  "  of  the  Catholic  persuasion 
were  in  the  habit  of  recovering  equivalents  for  the 
lands  of  which  they  considered  themselves  to  have 
been  robbed,  and  of  recovering  souls  at  the  same 
time  by  carrying  off  young  Protestant  girls  of 
fortune  to  the  mountains,  ravishing  them  there 
with  the  most  exquisite  brutality,  and  then  com- 
pelling them  to  go  through  a  form  of  marriage, 
which  a  priest  was  always  in  attendance  ready 
to  celebrate."       This  is  a  very  serious  charge, 
perhaps  as  serious  a  charge  as  could  well  be  made 
against  a  religious  communion.     It  was  an  accusa- 
tion improbable  on  the  face  of  it ;  for  while  the 
Church  of  Rome  in  the   course   of   her  strange, 
eventful   history   has   tampered   with   the   sixth 
commandment,    as   Protestants  call  it,  she  has 
never  underrated  the  virtue  of  chastity,  and  has 
always  proclaimed    a    high    standard  of    sexual 
morals.      In  his  zeal  to  justify  the  penal  laws 
against  Catholics  Froude  accepted  without  suffi- 
cient   inquiry    evidence  which    could  only  have 
satisfied  one  willing  to  believe  the  worst. 

Several  years  afterwards,  in  1878,  the   subject 
was    fully    discussed,    and   Froude's   conclusions 

1  English  in  Ireland,  vol.  i.  pp.  417-434. 
*  Ibid.,  p.  417. 


232  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

were  shown  to  be  unsound,  by  another  historian, 
William  Edward  Hartpole  Lecky.  Lecky  was  a 
much  more  formidable  critic  than  Freeman. 
Calm  in  temperament  and  moderate  in  language, 
he  could  take  part  in  an  historical  controversy 
without  getting  into  a  rage.  Freeman,  after 
pages  of  mere  abuse,  would  pounce  with  trium- 
phant ejaculations  upon  a  misprint.  Lecky  did 
not  waste  his  time  either  on  scolding  or  on  trifles. 
The  faults  he  found  were  grave,  and  his  censure 
was  not  the  less  severe  for  being  decorous.  An 
Anglicised  Irishman,  living  in  England,  though 
a  graduate  of  Dublin  University,  Lecky  became 
known  when  he  was  a  very  young  man  for  a 
brilliant  little  book  on  Leaders  of  Irish  Opinion. 
He  had  since  published  mature  and  valuable  his- 
tories of  rationalism,  and  of  morals.  His  History 
of  England  in  the  Eighteenth  Century  is  likely 
to  remain  a  standard  book,  being  written  with 
fairness,  lucidity,  and  candour.  It  is  true  that 
in  his  Irish  chapters,  with  which  alone  I  am  con- 
cerned, Lecky,  like  Froude,  wrote  with  a  purpose. 
He  was  an  Irish  patriot,  and  bent  on  making  out 
the  best  possible  case  for  his  own  country. 

At  the  same  time  he  was,  for  an  Irishman, 
singularly  impartial  between  Catholic  and  Pro- 
testant, leaning,  if  at  all,  to  the  Protestant  side. 
Yet  he  repudiated  with  indignant  vehemence 
Froude' s  attempt  to  connect  the  Catholic  Church 
with  these  atrocious  crimes.  I  am  bound  to  say 
that  I  think  he  disproves  the  charge  of  ecclesiastical 


IRELAND   AND   AMERICA  233 

complicity.     The   evidence   upon   which   Froude 
relied,  the  only  evidence  accessible,  is  the  collec- 
tion of  presentments  by  Grand  Juries,  with  the 
accompanying  depositions,  in  Dublin  Castle.     In 
the  first  sixty  years  of  the  eighteenth  century 
there  were  twenty-eight  cases  of  abduction  thus 
recorded.     In  only  four  of  them  can  it  be  shown 
that   the   perpetrator   was   a   Catholic   and    the 
victim  a  Protestant.     In  only  one,  which  Froude 
has  described  at  much  length,  did  the  criminal 
try  to  make  a  Protestant  girl  attend  mass.     For 
one  of  the  cases,  which  according  to  Froude  went 
unpunished,  two  men  were  hanged.     "  The  truth 
is,"  says  Lecky,  "  that  the  crime  was  merely  the 
natural  product  of  a  state  of  great  lawlessness 
and  barbarism."  l    These  offences  have  so  com- 
pletely disappeared  from  Ireland  that  even  the 
memory  of  them  has  perished,  and  yet   Ireland 
remains  as  Catholic  as  ever.     Arthur  Young,  who 
denounces    them    as    scandalous    to    a    civilised 
community,  does  not  hint  that  they  had  anything 
to   do  with   religion,   nor  were  they  ever  cited 
in  defence  of  the  penal  code.     Froude  was  led 
astray  by  religious  prejudice,  and  forgot  for  once 
the  historian  in  the  advocate.     The  penal  codes 
were  rather  the  cause  than  the  effect  of  crime  and 
outrage  in  Ireland.     By  setting  authority  on  one 
side,  and  popular  religion  on  the  other,  they  made 
a  breach  of  the  law  a  pious  and  meritorious  act. 
The  bane  of  English  rule  in  Ireland  at  that  time 

1  England  in  the  Eighteenth  Century,  ii.  365. 


234  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

was  the  treatment  of  Catholics  as  enemies,  and  the 
Charter  Schools  which  Froude  praises  were  em- 
ployed for  the  purpose  of  alienating  children  from 
the  faith  of  their  parents.  This  mean  and  paltry 
persecution  strengthened  intead  of  weakening  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church. 

Meanwhile  Froude  continued  his  History,  and 
by  the  beginning  of  the  year  1874  had  brought  it 
down  to  the  Union,  with  which  it  concludes.  No 
more  unsparing  indictment  of  a  nation  has  ever 
been  drawn.  Except  Lord  Clare,  and  the  Orange 
Lodges,  formed  after  the  Battle  of  the  Diamond, 
scarcely  an  Irishman  or  an  Irish  institution  is 
spared.  Grattan's  Parliament,  though  it  did  not 
contain  a  single  Catholic,  is  condemned  be- 
cause it  gave  the  Catholics  votes  in  1793.  The 
recall  of  Lord  Fitzwilliam,  an  Englishman  and  a 
Protestant,  in  1795,  is  justified  because  he  was  in 
favour  of  emancipation.  Flood  and  Curran  are 
treated  with  disdain.  Burke,  though  he  was 
no  more  a  Catholic  than  Froude  himself,  is  told 
that  he  was  not  a  true  Protestant,  and  did  not 
understand  his  own  countrymen.  Sir  Ralph 
Abercrombie  was  possessed  with  an  "  evil  spirit," 
because  he  urged  that  rebels  should  not  be 
punished  by  soldiers  without  the  sanction  of  the 
civil  magistrate.  His  successor,  General  Lake, 
who  was  responsible  for  pitch-caps,  receives  a 
gentle,  a  very  gentle,  reprimand. 

'  The  United  Irishmen  had  affected  the  fashion 
of  short  hair.     The  loyalists  called  them  Croppies, 


IRELAND    AND    AMERICA  235 

and  if  a  Croppy  prisoner  stood  silent  when  it  was 
certain  [without  a  trial]  that  he  could  confess 
with  effect,  paper  or  linen  caps  smeared  with 
pitch  were  forced  upon  his  head  to  bring  him  to 
his  senses.  Such  things  ought  not  to  have  been, 
and  such  things  would  not  have  been  had  General 
Lake  been  supplied  with  English  troops,  but  assas- 
sins and  their  accomplices  will  not  always  be 
delicately  handled  by  those  whose  lives  they  have 
threatened  occasionally.  Not  a  few  men  suffered 
who  were  innocent,  so  far  as  no  definite  guilt  could 
be  proved  against  them.  At  such  times,  however, 
those  who  are  not  actively  loyal  lie  in  the  border- 
land of  just  suspicion."  l  That  all  Irish  Catholics 
were  guilty  unless  they  could  prove  themselves 
to  be  innocent  is  a  proposition  which  cannot  be 
openly  maintained,  and  vitiates  history  if  it  be 
tacitly  assumed.  Froude  honestly  and  sincerely 
believed  that  the  Irish  people  were  unfit  for 
representative  government.  He  compares  the 
Irish  rebellion  of  1798  with  the  Indian  Mutiny  of 
1857,  and  suggests  that  Ireland  should  have  been 
treated  like  Oude.  Lord  Moira,  known  afterwards 
as  Lord  Hastings,  and  Governor-General  of  India, 
is  called  a  traitor  because  he  sympathised  wth  the 
aspirations  of  his  countrymen.  Lord  Cornwallis 
is  severely  censured  for  endeavouring  to  infuse  a 
spirit  of  moderation  into  the  Executive  after  the 
rebellion  had  been  put  down.  What  Cornwallis 
thought  of  the  means  by  which  the  Union  was 

1  English  in  Ireland,  iii.  336. 


236  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

carried  is  well  known.  "  I  long,"  he  said  in  1799, 
"  to  kick  those  whom  my  public  duty  obliges  me 
to  court.  My  occupation  is  to  negociate  and  job 
with  the  most  corrupt  people  under  heaven.  I 
despise  and  hate  myself  every  hour  for  engaging 
in  such  dirty  work,  and  am  supported  only  by 
the  reflection  that  without  a  Union  the  British 
Empire  must  be  dissolved."  That  is  the  real 
case  for  the  Union,  which  could  not  be  better 
stated  than  Cornwallis  has  stated  it.  Carried  by- 
corrupt  means  as  it  was,  it  might  have  met  with 
gradual  acquiescence  if  only  it  had  been  accom- 
panied, as  Pitt  meant  to  accompany  it,  by  Catholic 
emancipation.  On  this  point  Froude  goes  all 
lengths  with  George  III.,  whose  hatred  of  Catho- 
licism was  not  greater  than  his  own.  In  the 
development  of  his  theory,  he  was  courageous  and 
consistent.  He  struck  at  great  names,  denouncing 
"  the  persevering  disloyalty  of  the  Liberal  party, 
in  both  Houses  of  the  English  Legislature,"  in- 
cluding Fox,  Sheridan,  Tierney,  Holland,  the 
Dukes  of  Bedford  and  Norfolk,  who  dared  to 
propose  a  policy  of  conciliation  with  Ireland,  as 
Burke  had  proposed  it  with  the  American  colonies. 
Even  Pitt  does  not  come  up  to  Froude's  standard, 
for  Pitt  removed  Lord  Camden,  and  sent  out 
Lord  Cornwallis. 

It  is  no  disqualification  for  an  historian  to 
hold  definite  views,  which,  if  he  holds  them, 
it  must  surely  be  his  duty  to  express.  The 
fault  of  The  English  in  Ireland  is  to  overstate 


IRELAND    AND    AMERICA  237 

the  case,   to    make   it    appear    that   there    was 
no  ground   for  rebellion  in  1798,  and  no  objec- 
tion   to    union    in  1800.      The    whole    book   is 
written  on  the  supposition  that  the  Irish  are  an 
inferior  race  and  Catholicism  an  inferior  religion. 
So  far  as  religion  was  concerned,  Lecky  did  not 
disagree  with  Froude.     But  either  because  he  was 
an  Irishman,  or  because  he  had  a  judicial  mind, 
he  could  see  the  necessity  of  understanding  what 
Irish  Catholics  aimed  at  before  passing  judgment 
upon  them.     Froude  could  never  get  out  of  his 
mind  the  approval  of  treason  and  assassination 
to  which  in  the  sixteenth  century  the  Vatican  was 
committed.     It    may  be  fascinating  polemics  to 
taunt  the  Church  of  Rome  with  being  "  always 
the  same."     But  as  a  matter  of  fact  the  Church  is 
not  the  same.    It  improves  with  the  general  march 
of  the  progress  that  it  condemns.     Froude  fairly 
and  honourably  quotes  a  crucial  instance.     Pitt 
"  sought  the  opinion  of  the  Universities  of  France 
and  Spain  on  the  charge  generally  alleged  against 
Catholics  that  their  allegiance  to  their  sovereign 
was  subordinate  to  their  allegiance  to  the  Pope  ; 
that  they  held   that  heretics  might  lawfully  be 
put  to  death,  and  that  no  faith  was  to  be  kept 
with  them.     The  Universities  had  unanimously 
disavowed  doctrines  which  they  declared  at  once 
inhuman  and  unchristian,  and  on  the  strength  of 
the   disavowal   the   British   Parliament   repealed 
the    Penal    Acts    of    William    for    England  and 
Scotland,  restored  to  the  Catholics  the  free  use 


238  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

of  their  chapels,  and  readmitted  them  to  the 
magistracy."  Toleration  was  extended  to  Ireland 
by  giving  the  franchise  to  Catholics,  and  complete 
emancipation  might  have  followed  but  for  the 
interference  of  the  king,  which  involved  the  recall 
of  Lord  Fitz william. 

To   prevent   that  calamitous   measure  no  one 
worked    harder    than    Edmund     Burke,     whose 
religion   was   as    rational   as   his  patriotism  was 
sincere.     In    the   last   of    his   published  letters, 
written  to   Sir  Hercules   Langrishe,   in  the   year 
before  the  rebellion,  the  year  of  his  own  death, 
he  said   that  "  Ireland,  locally,  civilly,  and   com- 
mercially  independent,  ought   politically  to  look 
up  to  Great  Britain  in  all  matters  of  peace  or  war ; 
in  all  those  points  to  be  guided  by  her:  and  in  a 
word,  with  her  to  live  and  to  die."     "  At  bottom," 
he  added,  "  Ireland  has  no  other  choice ;  I  mean 
no  other  rational  choice."     To  a  Parliamentary 
Union  accompanied  by  emancipation  Burke  might 
have  been  brought  by  the  rebellion.     Protestant 
ascendency  as  understood  in  his  time  he  would 
always  have  repudiated,  if  only  because  it  furnished 
recruits  to  the  Jacobinism  which  he  loathed  more 
than  anything  else  in  the  world.     He  even  denied 
that  there  was  such  a  thing  as  the  Protestant 
religion.     The   difference  between   Protestantism 
and  Catholicism  was,  he  said,  a  negative,  and  out 
of   a   negative   no  religion  could  be   made.     To 
persecute  people  for  believing  too  much  was  even 
more  preposterous   than   to  persecute  them   for 


IRELAND   AND   AMERICA  239 

believing  too  little.     Protestant  ascendency  was 
social  ascendency,  and  had  no  motive  so  respect- 
able as  bigotry  behind  it.     Burke  never  conceived 
the  possibility  of  disestablishing  the  Irish  Church, 
or  even  of  curtailing  its  emoluments.     He  would 
have  been  satisfied  with  a  Parliament  from  which 
Catholics   were   not   excluded.     Froude   brushed 
almost  contemptuously  aside  the  theories  of  an 
illustrious  Irishman,  the  first  political  writer  of  his 
age,  and  an  almost  fanatical  enemy  of  revolution. 
Genius  apart,  Burke  was  peculiarly  well  quali- 
fied to  form  an  opinion.     He  knew  England  as 
well  as  Ireland  ;  and  imperial  as  his  conceptions 
were,  they  never  extinguished  his  love  for  the 
land  of  his  birth.     He  was  himself  a  member  of 
the  Established  Church,  and  a  firm  supporter  of 
her  connection  with  the  State.     But  his  wife  was 
a  Roman  Catholic,  and  for  the  old  faith  he  had  a 
sympathetic  respect.     For  the  French  Directory, 
with  which  Wolfe  Tone  was  associated,  he  felt 
a  passionate  hatred  of  which  he  has  left  a  monu- 
ment  more  durable  than  brass  in  the  Reflections 
on  the   French  Revolution,  and   the  Letters  on  a 
Regicide  Peace.     He  worshipped  the  British  Con- 
stitution  with   the   unquestioning   fervour   of   a 
devotee,  and  he  had  been  attacked  by  the  new 
Whigs  in  Parliament  as  the  recipient  of  a  pension 
from  the  king.     The    old  Whigs,  his  Whigs,  had 
coalesced  with  Pitt,  and  the  chief  fault  he  found 
with  the  Government  was  that  it  did  not  carry 
on  the  French  war  with  sufficient  vigour.    That 


240  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

Burke  should  have  retained  his  calmness  of  mind 
in  writing  of  Ireland  when  he  lost  it  in  writing 
of  all  other  subjects  is  a  curious  circumstance. 
But  it  is  a  circumstance  which  entitles  him  to 
peculiar  attention  from  the  Irish  historian.  Burke 
was  no  oracle  of  Irish  revolutionists.  Their  hero 
was  his  critic,  Tom  Paine.  Yet  Froude  says  that 
when  Burke  "  took  up  the  Irish  cause  at  last  in 
earnest,  it  was  with  a  brain  which  the  French 
Revolution  had  deranged,  and  his  interference 
became  infinitely  mischievous."  l  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  his  interference  after  1789  had  no  result 
at  all.  So  far  as  the  French  Revolution  modified 
his  ideas,  it  made  them  more  Conservative  than 
ever,  and  his  object  in  preaching  the  conciliation 
of  Catholics  was  to  deter  them  from  Revolutionary 
methods. 

But  Burke,  like  Grattan,  was  an  Irishman,  and 
therefore  not  to  be  trusted.  If  he  had  been 
an  Englishman,  or  if  he  had  gloried  in  the  name 
of  Protestant,  Froude's  eyes  would  have  been 
opened,  and  he  would  have  seen  Burke's  incom- 
parable superiority  to  Lord  Clare  as  a  just 
interpreter  of  events.  Froude  looked  at  the 
rebellion  and  the  Union  from  an  Orange  Lodge, 
and  his  book  is  really  an  Orange  manifesto.  Such 
works  have  their  purpose,  and  Froude's  is  an 
unusually  eloquent  specimen  of  its  class;  but 
they  are  not  history,  any  more  than  the  speech 
of  Lord  Clare  on  the  Union,  or  the  Diary  of  Wolfe 

1  English  in  Ireland,  ii.  214,  215. 


IRELAND   AND   AMERICA  241 

Tone.  Froude  does  not  explain,  nor  seem  to 
understand,  what  the  supporters  of  the  Irish 
Legislature  meant.  Speaker  Foster  said  that  the 
whole  unbribed  intellect  of  Ireland  was  against 
the  Union.  Foster  was  the  last  Speaker  in  the 
Irish  House  of  Commons.  He  had  been  elected 
in  1790  against  the  "  patriot "  Ponsonby,  and 
was  opposed  to  the  Catholic  franchise  in  1793. 
He  was  a  man  of  unblemished  character,  and  in 
a  position  where  he  could  not  afford  to  talk  non- 
sense. Yet,  if  Froude  were  right,  nonsense  he 
must  have  talked.  Cornwallis,  an  Englishman, 
corroborates  Foster ;  Cornwallis  is  disregarded. 
"  All  that  was  best  and  noblest  in  Ireland  "  was 
gathered  into  the  Orange  Association,  which  has 
been  the  plague  of  every  Irish  Government  since 
the  Union,  Froude's  model  sovereign  of  Ireland, 
as  of  England,  was  George  III.,  who  ordered  that 
in  a  Catholic  country  "  a  sharp  eye  should  be  kept 
on  Papists,"  and  would  doubtless  have  joined 
an  Orange  Lodge  himself  if  he  had  been  an  Irishman 
and  a  subject.  The  English  in  Ireland  is  reported 
to  have  been  ParnelTs  favourite  book.  It  made 
him,  he  said,  a  Home  Ruler  because  it  exposed 
the  iniquities  of  the  English  Government.  This 
was  not  Froude's  principal  object,  but  the  testi- 
mony to  his  truthfulness  is  all  the  more  striking 
on  that  account.  Gladstone,  who  quoted  from 
the  English  in  Ireland  when  he  introduced  his 
Land  Purchase  Bill  in  1886,  paid  a  just  tribute 
to  the  "truth  and  honour"  of  the  writer. 
(3310)  16 


242  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

If  it  be  once  granted  that  the  Irish  are  a  subject 
race,  that  the  Catholic  faith  is  a  degrading  super- 
stition, and  that  Ireland  is  only  saved  from  ruin 
by  her  English  or  Scottish  settlers,  Froude's  book 
deserves  little  but  praise.  Although  he  did  not 
study  for  it  as  he  studied  for  his  History  of  England 
he  read  and  copied  a  large  number  of  State  Papers, 
with  a  great  mass  of  official  correspondence. 
Freeman  would  have  been  appalled  at  the  idea 
of  such  research  as  Froude  made  in  Dublin,  and 
at  the  Record  Office  in  London.  But  the  scope 
of  his  book,  and  the  thesis  he  was  to  develop, 
had  formed  themselves  in  his  mind  before  he 
began.  He  was  to  vindicate  the  Protestant  cause 
in  Ireland,  and  to  his  own  satisfaction  he  vindicated 
it.  If  I  may  apply  a  phrase  coined  many  years 
afterwards,  Froude  assumed  that  Irish  Catholics 
had  taken  a  double  dose  of  original  sin.  He  always 
found  in  them  enough  vice  to  account  for  any 
persecution  of  which  they  might  be  the  victims. 
Just  as  he  could  not  write  of  Kerry  without 
imputing  failure  and  instability  to  O'Connell,  so  he 
could  not  write  about  Ireland  without  traducing  the 
leaders  of  Irish  opinion.  They  might  be  Protest- 
ants themselves ;  but  they  had  Catholics  for  their 
followers,  and  that  was  enough.  It  was  enough  for 
Carlyle  also,  and  to  attack  Froude's  historical 
reputation  is  to  attack  Carlyle' s.  "  I  have  read," 
Carlyle  wrote  on  the  2Oth  of  June,  1874,  "  all  your 
book  carefully  over  again,  and  continue  to  think  of 
it  not  less  but  rather  more  favourably  than  ever  : 


IRELAND    AND    AMERICA  243 

a  few  little  phrases  and  touches  you  might  perhaps 
alter  with  advantage  ;  and  the  want  of  a  copious, 
carefully  weighed  concluding  chapter  is  more 
sensible  to  me  than  ever  ;  but  the  substance  of  the 
book  is  genuine  truth,  and  the  utterance  of  it  is 
clear,  sharp,  smiting,  and  decisive,  like  a  shining 
Damascus  sabre  ;  I  never  doubted  or  doubt  but 
its  effect  will  be  great  and  lasting.  No  criticism 
have  I  seen  since  you  went  away  that  was  worth 
notice.  Poor  Lecky  is  weak  as  water — bilge-water 
with  a  drop  of  formic  acid  in  it :  unfortunate  Lecky, 
he  is  wedded  to  his  Irish  idols  ;  let  him  alone." 
The  reference  to  Lecky,  as  unfair  as  it  is  amusing, 
was  provoked  by  a  review  of  Froude  in  Macmillan's 
Magazine.  There  are  worse  idols  than  Burke,  or 
even  Grattan,  and  Lecky  was  an  Irishman  after  all. 
A  very  different  critic  from  Carlyle  expressed 
an  equally  favourable  opinion. 

'  I  have  an  interesting  letter,"  Froude  wrote  to 
his  friend  Lady  Derby,  formerly  Lady  Salisbury, 
"  from  Bancroft  the  historian  (American  minister 
at  Berlin)  on  the  Irish  book.  He,  I  am  happy  to 
say,  accepts  the  view  which  I  wished  to  impress 
on  the  Americans,  and  he  has  sent  me  some 
curious  correspondence  from  the  French  Foreign 
Office  illustrating  and  confirming  one  of  my  points. 
One  evening  last  summer  I  met  Lady  Salisbury,1 
and  told  her  my  opinion  of  Lord  Clare.  She  dis- 
sented with  characteristic  emphasis — and  she  is  not 
a  lady  who  can  easily  be  moved  from  her  judg- 

1  The  wife  of  the  late  Prime  Minister. 


244  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

ments.  Still,  if  she  finds  time  to  read  the  book  I 
should  like  to  hear  that  she  can  recognise  the  merits 
as  well  as  the  demerits  of  a  statesman  who,  in  the 
former  at  least,  so  nearly  resembled  her  husband." 

In  another  letter  he  says  : 

"  The  meaning  of  the  book  as  a  whole  is  to 
show  what  comes  of  forcing  uncongenial  institu- 
tions on  a  country  to  which  they  are  unsuited. 
If  we  had  governed  Ireland  as  we  govern  India, 
there  would  have  been  no  confiscation,  no  perse- 
cution of  religion,  and  consequently  none  of  the 
reasons  for  disloyalty.  Having  chosen  to  set  up  a 
Parliament  and  an  Established  Church,  and  to  seize 
the  lands  of  the  old  owners,  we  left  nothing  undone 
to  spoil  the  chances  of  success  with  the  experiment." 

Froude  went  to  the  United  States  with  no  very 
exalted  opinion  of  the  Irish;  he  returned  with 
the  lowest  possible.  "  Like  all  Irish  patriots," 
including  Grattan,  Wolfe  Tone  "  would  have 
accepted  greedily  any  tolerable  appointment  from 
the  Government  which  he  had  been  execrating/' 
The  subsequent  history  of  Ireland  has  scarcely 
justified  this  sweeping  invective.  '  There  are 
persons  who  believe  that  if  the  king  had  not 
interfered  with  Lord  Fitzwilliam,  the  Irish  Catho- 
lics would  have  accepted  gratefully  the  religious 
equality  which  he  was  prepared  to  offer  them,  and 
would  have  remained  thenceforward  for  all  time 
contented  citizens  of  the  British  Empire."  So 
reasonable  a  theory  requires  more  convincing 
refutation  than  a  simple  statement  that  it  is 


IRELAND    AND    AMERICA  245 

"  incredible."  Incredible,  no  doubt,  if  the  Catho- 
lics of  Ireland  were  wild  beasts,  cringing  under 
the  whip,  ferocious  when  released  from  restraint. 
Very  credible  indeed  if  Irish  Catholics  in  1795 
were  like  other  people,  asking  for  justice,  and  not 
expecting  an  impossible  ascendency.  Interesting 
as  Froude's  narrative  is,  it  becomes,  when  read 
together  with  Lecky's,  more  interesting  still. 
Though  indignant  with  Froude's  aspersions  upon 
the  Irish  race,  Lecky  did  not  allow  himself  to  be 
hurried.  He  was  writing  a  history  of  England  as 
well  as  of  Ireland,  and  the  Irish  chapters  had  to 
wait  their  turn.  In  Froude's  book  there  are  signs 
of  haste ;  in  Lecky's  there  are  none.  Without  the 
brilliancy  and  the  eloquence  which  distinguished 
Froude,  Lecky  had  a  power  of  marshalling  facts 
that  gave  to  each  of  them  its  proper  value.  No 
human  being  is  without  prejudice.  But  Lecky  was 
curiously  unlike  the  typical  Irishman  of  Froude's 
imagination.  He  has  written  what  is  by  general 
acknowledgment  the  fairest  account  of  the  Irish 
rebellion,  and  of  the  Union  to  which  it  led.  Of 
the  eight  volumes  which  compose  his  History  of 
England  in  the  Eighteenth  Century,  two,  the  seventh 
and  eighth,  are  devoted  exclusively  to  Ireland. 

After  the  publication  of  his  first  two  volumes 
he  made  no  direct  reference  to  Froude,  and 
contented  himself  with  his  own  independent 
narrative.  He  vindicated  the  conduct  of  Lord 
Fitzwilliam,  and  traced  to  his  recall  in  1795  the 
desperate  courses  adopted  by  Irish  Catholics,  He 


246  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

showed  that  Froude  had  been  unjust  to  the  Whigs 
who  gave  evidence  for  Arthur  O'Connor  at  Maid- 
stone  in  1798,  and  especially  to  Grattan.  That 
O'Connor  was  engaged  in  treasonable  correspon- 
dence with  France  there  can  be  no  doubt  now. 
But  he  did  not  tell  his  secrets  to  his  Whig  friends, 
and  what  Grattan  said  of  his  never  having 
heard  O'Connor  talk  about  a  French  invasion 
was  undoubtedly  true.1  Froude's  hatred  of  the 
English  Whigs  almost  equalled  his  contempt  for 
the  Irish  Catholics,  and  the  two  feelings  prevented 
him  from  writing  anything  like  an  impartial 
narrative  either  of  the  rebellion  or  of  the  Union. 
No  other  book  of  his  shows  such  evident  traces 
of  having  been  written  under  the  influence  of 
Carlyle.  Carlyle's  horror  of  democracy,  his 
worship  of  force,  his  belief  that  martial  law 
was  the  law  of  Almighty  God,  and  that  cruelty 
might  always  be  perpetrated  on  the  right  side, 
are  conspicuously  displayed.  If  Froude  spoke  of 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  he  always  seemed 
to  fancy  himself  back  in  the  sixteenth  century, 
when  the  murder  of  Protestants  was  regarded 
at  the  Vatican  as  justifiable.  The  Irish  rebellion 
of  1798  was  led  by  Protestants,  like  Lord  Edward 
Fitzgerald,  and  free  thinkers,  like  Wolfe  Tone. 
But  for  the  recall  of  Lord  Fitzwilliam,  the  Catholics 
would  have  taken  no  part  in  it,  and  it  would  not 
have  been  more  dangerous  than  the  rebellion  of 

1  See  Froude's  English  in  Ireland,  vol.  iii.  pp.  320,  321 ;  Lecky's 
History  of  England,  vol.  viii.  p.  52. 


IRELAND    AND    AMERICA  247 

1848.  Such  at  least  was  Lecky's  opinion,  sup- 
ported by  weighty  arguments,  and  by  facts  which 
cannot  be  denied.  If  Froude's  reputation  as  an 
historian  depended  upon  his  English  in  Ireland, 
it  certainly  would  not  stand  high.  Of  course 
he  had  as  much  right  to  put  the  English  case  as 
Father  Burke  had  to  put  the  Irish  one.  But 
his  responsibility  was  far  greater,  and  his  splendid 
talents  might  have  been  better  employed  than 
in  reviving  the  mutual  animosities  of  religion  or 
of  race. 

When  Lecky  reviewed,  with  much  critical 
asperity,  the  last  two  volumes  of  Froude's  English 
in  Ireland  for  Macmillan's  Magazine  *  he  referred 
to  Home  Rule  as  a  moderate  and  constitutional 
movement.  His  own  History  was  not  completed 
till  1890.  But  when  Gladstone  introduced  his 
first  Home  Rule  Bill,  in  1886,  Lecky  opposed  it 
as  strongly  as  Froude  himself.  Lecky  was  quite 
logical,  for  the  question  whether  the  Union  had 
been  wisely  or  legitimately  carried  had  very  little 
to  do  with  the  expedience  of  repealing  it.  Fieri 
non  debuit,  factum  valet,  may  be  common  sense 
as  well  as  good  law.  But  Froude  was  not 
unnaturally  triumphant  to  find  his  old  antagonist 
in  Irish  matters  on  his  side,  especially  as  Freeman 
was  a  Home  Ruler.  Froude's  attitude  was  never 
for  a  moment  doubtful.  He  had  always  held 
that  the  Irish  people  were  quite  unfitted  for 
self-government,  and  of  all  English  statesmen 

1  June,   1874. 


248  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

Gladstone  was  the  one  he  trusted  least.  He 
had  a  theory  that  great  orators  were  always 
wrong,  even  when,  like  Pitt  and  Fox,  they 
were  on  opposite  sides.  Gladstone  he  doubly  re- 
pudiated as  a  High  Churchman  and  a  Democrat. 
Yet,  with  more  candour  than  consistency,  he 
always  declared  that  Gladstone  was  the  English 
statesman  who  best  understood  the  Irish  Land 
Question,  and  so  he  plainly  told  the  Liberal 
Unionists,  speaking  as  one  of  themselves.  He 
had  praised  Henry  VIII.  for  confiscating  the 
Irish  estates  of  absentees,  and  taunted  Pitt  with 
his  unreasoning  horror  of  an  absentee  tax.  He 
would  have  given  the  Irish  people  almost  every- 
thing rather  than  allow  them  to  do  anything  for 
themselves.  In  1880  he  brought  out  another 
edition  of  his  Irish  book,  with  a  new  chapter  on 
the  crisis.  The  intervening  years  had  made  no 
difference  in  his  estimate  of  Ireland,  or  of  Irishmen. 
O'Connell,  who  had  nothing  to  do  with  the  politics 
of  the  eighteenth  century,  was  "  not  sincere  about 
repeal,"  although  he  "  forced  the  Whigs  to  give 
him  whatever  he  might  please  to  ask  for,"  l  and 
he  certainly  asked  for  that. 

That  Catholic  emancipation  was  useless  and 
mischievous,  Froude  never  ceased  to  declare.  He 
would  have  dragooned  the  Irish  into  Protestantism 
and  made  the  three  Catholic  provinces  into  a  Crown 
colony.  The  Irish  establishment  he  regretted  as 
a  badge  of  Protestant  ascendency.  But  he  was  a 

1  English  in  Ireland,  ?88i,  vol.  iii.  p.  568, 


IRELAND    AND    AMERICA  249 

dangerous  ally  for  Unionists.  That  the  govern- 
ment of  Ireland  by  what  he  called  a  Protestant 
Parliament  sitting  at  Westminister,  meaning  the 
Parliament  of  the  United  Kingdom,  had  failed, 
he  not  merely  admitted,  but  loudly  proclaimed. 
It  had  failed  "  more  signally,  and  more  disgrace- 
fully," than  any  other  system,  because  Gladstone 
admitted  that  Fenian  outrages  precipitated  legis- 
lative reforms.  The  alternative  was  to  rule 
Ireland,  or  let  her  be  free,  and  altogether  separate 
from  Great  Britain.  Neither  branch  of  the  sup- 
posed alternative  was  within  the  range  of  practical 
politics.  But  on  one  point  Froude  unconsciously 
anticipated  the  immediate  future.  "  The  remedy  " 
for  the  agrarian  troubles  of  Ireland  was,  he  said, 
"  the  establishment  of  courts  to  which  the  tenant 
might  appeal."  The  ink  of  this  sentence  was 
scarcely  dry  when  the  Irish  Land  Bill  of  1881 
appeared  with  that  very  provision.  Froude  was 
always  ready  and  willing  to  promote  the  material 
benefit  of  Ireland.  Irishmen,  except  the  Protestant 
population  of  Ulster,  were  children  to  be  treated 
with  firmness  and  kindness,  the  truest  kindness 
being  never  to  let  them  have  their  own  way. 


CHAPTER    VII 

SOUTH  AFRICA 

BEFORE  Froude  had  written  the  last  chapter 
of  The  English  in  Ireland  he  was  visited  by 
the  greatest  sorrow  of  his  life.  Mrs.  Froude  died 
suddenly  in  February,  1874.  It  had  been  a  perfect 
marriage,  and  he  never  enjoyed  the  same  entire 
happiness  afterwards.  Carry le  and  his  faithful 
friend  Fitzjames  Stephen  were  the  only  persons  he 
could  see  at  first,  though  he  manfully  completed 
the  book  on  which  he  was  engaged.  It  was  long 
before  he  rallied  from  the  shock,  and  he  felt  as 
if  he  could  never  write  again.  He  dreaded  "the 
length  of  years  which  might  yet  lie  ahead  of  him 
before  he  could  have  his  discharge  from  service." 
He  took  a  melancholy  pride  in  noting  that  none 
of  the  reviewers  discovered  any  special  defects 
in  those  final  pages  of  his  book  which  had  been 
written  under  such  terrible  conditions.  Mrs. 
Froude  had  thoroughly  understood  all  her  hus- 
band's moods,  and  her  quiet  humour  always 
cheered  him  in  those  hours  of  gloom  from  which 
a  man  of  his  sensitive  nature  could  not  escape. 
She  could  use  a  gentle  mockery  which  was 
always  effective,  along  with  her  common  sense^ 

250 


SOUTH   AFRICA  251 

in  bringing  out  the  true  proportions  of  things. 
Conscious  as  she  was  of  his  social  brilliancy  and 
success,  she  would  often  tell  the  children  that 
they  lost  nothing  by  not  going  out  with  him, 
because  their  father  talked  better  at  home  than 
he  talked  anywhere  else.  Her  deep  personal 
religion  was  the  form  of  belief  with  which  he  had 
most  sympathy,  and  which  he  best  understood, 
regarding  it  as  the  foundation  of  virtue  and 
conduct  and  honour  and  truth.  He  attended 
with  her  the  services  of  the  Church,  which  satis- 
fied him  whenever  they  were  performed  with 
the  reverent  simplicity  familiar  to  his  boyhood. 
Happily  he  was  not  left  alone.  He  had  two  young 
children  to  love,  and  his  eldest  daughter  was  able 
to  take  her  stepmother's  place  as  mistress  of  his 
house.  With  the  children  he  left  London  as  soon 
as  he  could,  and  tried  to  occupy  his  mind  by 
reading  to  them  from  Don  Quixote,  or,  on  a  Sunday, 
from  The  Pilgrim's  Progress.  To  the  end  of  his 
life  he  felt  his  loss  ;  and  when  he  was  offered, 
fifteen  years  later,  the  chance  of  going  back  to  his 
beloved  Derreen,  he  shrank  from  the  associations 
it  would  have  recalled. 

He  took  a  house  for  his  family  in  Wales,  which 
he  described  in  the  following  letter  to  Lady  Derby  : 

"CROGAN  HOUSE,  CORWEN,  June  $rd,  1874. 

"  I  do  not  know  if  I  told  you  upon  what  a 
curious  and  interesting  old  place  we  have  fallen 
for  our  retirement.  The  walls  of  the  room  in 


252  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

which  I  am  writing  are  five  feet  thick.  The  old 
part  of  the  house  must  have  been  an  Abbey 
Grange  ;  the  cellars  run  into  a  British  tumulus, 
the  oaks  in  the  grounds  must  many  of  them  be 
as  old  as  the  Conquest,  and  the  site  of  the  parish 
church  was  a  place  of  pilgrimage  probably  before 
Christianity.  Stone  coffins  are  turned  over  on 
the  hillsides  in  making  modern  improvements. 
Denfil  Gadenis'  (the  mediaeval  Welsh  saint's) 
wooden  horn  still  stands  in  the  church  porch, 
and  the  sense  of  strangeness  and  antiquity  is  the 
more  palpable  because  hardly  a  creature  in  the 
valley,  except  the  cows  and  the  birds,  speak  in 
a  language  familiar  to  me.  It  was  Owen  Glen- 
dower's  country.  Owen  himself  doubtless  has 
many  times  ridden  down  the  avenue.  We  are  in 
the  very  heart  of  Welsh  nationality,  which  was 
always  a  respectable  thing — far  more  so  than  the 
Celticism  of  the  Gaels  and  Irish.  We  are  apt  to 
forget  that  the  Tudors  were  Welsh." 

Fortunately  a  plan  suggested  itself  which  gave 
him  variety  of  occupation  and  change  of  scene. 
Disraeli's  Government  had  just  come  into  office, 
and  with  the  Colonial  Secretary,  Lord  Carnarvon, 
Froude  was  on  intimate  terms.  Froude  had 
always  been  interested  in  the  Colonies,  and  was 
an  advocate  of  Federation  long  before  it  had 
become  a  popular  scheme.  As  early  as  1870  he 
wrote  to  Skelton :  "  Gladstone  and  Co.  deliberately 
intend  to  shake  off  the  Colonies.  They  are 
privately  using  their  command  of  the  situation 


SOUTH  AFRICA  253 

to  make  the  separation  inevitable."  l  I  do  not 
know  what  this  means.  Lord  Dufferin  has  left  it 
on  record  that  after  his  appointment  to  Canada 
in  1872  Lowe  came  up  to  him  at  the  club,  and 
said,  "  Now,  you  ought  to  make  it  your  business 
to  get  rid  of  the  Dominion."  But  Lowe  was  in 
the  habit  of  saying  paradoxical  things,  and  it  was 
Disraeli,  not  Gladstone,  who  spoke  of  the  Colonies 
as  millstones  round  our  necks.  Cardwell,  the 
Secretary  for  War,  withdrew  British  troops  from 
Canada  and  New  Zealand,  holding  that  the  self- 
governing  Colonies  should  be  responsible  for  their 
own  defence.  That  wise  policy  fostered  union 
rather  than  separation,  by  providing  that  the 
working  classes  at  home  should  not  be  taxed  for 
the  benefit  of  their  colonial  fellow-subjects.  Lord 
Carnarvon  himself  had  passed  in  1867  the  Bill 
which  federated  Canada  and  which  his  Liberal 
predecessor  had  drawn.  He  was  now  anxious  to 
carry  out  a  similar  scheme  in  South  Africa,  and 
Froude  offered  to  find  out  for  him  how  the  land 
lay.  His  visit  was  not  to  be  in  any  sense  official. 
He  would  be  ostensibly  travelling  for  his  health, 
which  was  always  set  up  by  a  voyage.  He  was 
interested  in  extending  to  South  Africa  Miss 
Rye's  benevolent  plans  of  emigration  to  Canada ; 
in  the  treatment  of  a  Kaffir  chief  called  Langa- 
libalele  ;  and  in  the  disputes  which  had  arisen 
from  the  annexation  of  the  Diamond  Fields.  Thus 
there  were  reasons  for  his  trip  enough  and  to 

1   Table  Talk  of  Shirley,  p.   142. 


254  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

spare.  He  would,  it  was  thought,  be  more  likely 
to  obtain  accurate  information  if  the  principal 
purpose  of  his  visit  were  kept  in  the  background. 

There  was  one  great  and  fundamental  difference 
between  the  case  of  Canada  and  the  case  of  South 
Africa.  Canada  had  itself  asked  for  federation, 
and  Parliament  simply  gave  effect  to  the  wish  of 
the  Canadians.  Opinion  in  South  Africa  was 
notoriously  divided,  and  the  centre  of  opposition 
was  at  Cape  Town.  Natal  had  not  yet  obtained 
a  full  measure  of  self-government,  and  the  Lieu- 
tenant-Go vernor,  Sir  Benjamin  Pine,  had  excited 
indignation  among  all  friends  of  the  natives  by  his 
arbitrary  imprisonment,  after  a  mock  trial,  of  a 
Kaffir  chief.  Lord  Carnarvon  had  carefully  to 
consider  this  case,  and  also  to  decide  whether  the 
mixed  Constitution  of  Natal,  which  would  not 
work,  should  be  reformed  or  annulled.  A  still  more 
serious  difficulty  was  connected  with  the  Diamond 
Fields,  officially  known  as  Griqualand  West.  The 
ownership  of  this  district  had  been  disputed 
between  the  Orange  Free  State  and  a  native 
chief  called  Nicholas  Waterboer.  In  1871  Lord 
Kimberley,  as  Secretary  of  State  for  the  Colonies, 
had  purchased  it  from  Waterboer  at  a  price 
ludicrously  small  in  proportion  to  its  value,  and 
it  had  since  been  annexed  to  the  British  dominions 
by  the  Governor,  Sir  Henry  Barkly.  Waterboer, 
who  knew  nothing  about  the  value  of  money, 
was  satisfied.  The  Orange  State  vehemently 
protested,  and  President  Brand  denounced  the 


SOUTH  AFRICA  255 

annexation  as  a  breach  of  faith.  Not  only,  he 
said,  were  the  Diamond  Fields  within  the  limits 
of  his  Republic ;  the  agreement  between  Water- 
boer  and  the  Secretary  of  State  was  itself  a  breach 
of  the  Orange  River  Convention,  by  which  Great 
Britain  undertook  not  to  negotiate  with  any 
native  chief  north  of  the  River  Vaal.  Lord 
Kimberley  paid  no  heed  to  Brand's  remonstrances. 
He  denied  altogether  the  validity  of  the  Dutch 
claim,  and  he  would  not  hear  of  arbitration.  By 
the  time  that  Lord  Carnarvon  came  into  office 
thousands  of  British  settlers  were  digging  for 
diamonds  in  Griqualand  West,  and  its  abandon- 
ment was  impossible.  Brand  himself  did  not  wish 
to  take  the  responsibility  of  governing  it.  But  he 
continued  to  press  the  case  for  compensation,  and 
the  British  Government,  which  had  forced  inde- 
pendence upon  the  Boers,  appeared  in  the  invidious 
light  of  shirking  responsibility  while  grasping  at 
mineral  wealth.  If  it  had  not  been  for  this 
untoward  incident,  the  Dutch  Republics  would 
have  been  more  favourable  to  Lord  Carnarvon's 
policy  than  Cape  Colony  was.  The  Transvaal 
was  imperfectly  protected  against  the  formidable 
power  of  the  Zulus,  and  a  general  rising  of  blacks 
against  whites  was  the  real  danger  which 
threatened  South  Africa. 

That  peril,  however,  was  felt  more  acutely  in 
Natal  than  in  Cape  Colony.  The  Cape  had  for 
two  years  enjoyed  responsible  government,  and  its 
first  Prime  Minister  was  John  Charles  Molteno. 


256  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

Molteno  was  not  in  any  other  respect  a  remarkable 
man.  He  had  come  to  the  post  by  adroit  manage- 
ment of  a  miscellaneous  community,  comprising 
British,  Dutch,  and  Kaffirs.  He  was  personally 
incorruptible,  and  he  played  the  game  according 
to  the  rules.  He  would  have  called  himself,  and 
so  far  as  his  opportunities  admitted,  he  was,  a 
constitutional  statesman,  justly  proud  of  the 
position  to  which  his  own  qualities  had  raised 
him,  and  extremely  jealous  of  interference  from 
Downing  Street.  He  had  no  responsibility,  as 
he  was  never  tired  of  explaining,  for  the  acquisition 
of  the  Diamond  Fields,  and  he  left  the  Colonial 
Office  to  settle  that  matter  with  President  Brand. 
Local  politics  were  his  business.  He  did  not 
look  beyond  the  House  of  Assembly  at  Cape  Town, 
which  it  was  his  duty  to  lead,  and  the  Governor, 
Sir  Henry  Barkly,  with  whom  he  was  on  excellent 
terms.  His  own  origin,  which  was  partly  English 
and  partly  Italian,  made  it  easy  for  him  to  be 
impartial  between  the  two  white  races  in  South 
Africa.  For  the  Kaffirs  he  had  no  great  tender- 
ness. They  had  votes,  and  if  they  chose  to  sell 
them  for  brandy  that  was  their  own  affair.  Of 
what  would  now  be  called  Imperialism  Molteno 
had  no  trace.  He  would  support  Federation  when 
in  his  opinion  it  suited  the  interests  of  Cape  Colony, 
and  not  an  hour  before. 

Froude  left  Dartmouth  in  the  W aimer  Castle  on 
the  23rd  of  August,  1874.  He  occupied  himself 
during  the  voyage  partly  in  discussing  the  affairs 


SOUTH  AFRICA  257 

of  the  Cape  with  his  fellow-passengers,  and  partly 
in  reading  Greek.  The  "Leaves  from  a  South 
African  Journal,"  which  close  the  third  volume  of 
Short  Studies,  describe  his  journey  in  his  most 
agreeably  colloquial  style.  A  piece  of  literary 
criticism  adorns  the  entry  for  September  4th.  "  I 
have  been  feeding  hitherto  on  Greek  plays :  this 
morning  I  took  Homer  instead,  and  the  change 
is  from  a  hot-house  to  the  open  air.  The  Greek 
dramatists,  even  ^Eschylus  himself,  are  burdened 
with  a  painful  consciousness  of  the  problems  of 
human  life,  with  perplexed  theories  of  Fate  and 
Providence.  Homer  is  fresh,  free,  and  salt  as  the 
ocean." 

No  sooner  had  Froude  landed  at  Cape  Town 
than  he  began  tracing  all  its  evils  to  responsible 
government.  The  solidity  of  the  houses  reminded 
him  that  they  were  built  under  an  absolute  system. 
'  What  is  it  which  has  sent  our  Colonies  into  so 
sudden  a  frenzy  for  what  they  call  political 
liberty  ?  "  A  movement  which  has  been  in  steady 
progress  for  thirty  years  can  scarcely  be  called 
sudden,  even  though  it  be  regarded  as  a  frenzy, 
and  so  far  back  as  1776  there  were  British  colonists 
beyond  the  seas  who  attached  some  practical 
value  to  freedom.  A  drive  across  the  peninsula 
of  Table  Mountain  suggested  equally  positive  re- 
flections of  another  kind.  "  Were  England  wise 
in  her  generation,  a  line  of  forts  from  Table  Bay 
to  False  Bay  would  be  the  northern  limit  of  her 
Imperial  responsibilities."  This  had  been  the 
(331*)  17 


258  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

cherished  policy  of  Lord  Grey  at  the  Colonial 
Office,  and  the  Whigs  generally  inclined  to  the 
same  view.  But  it  was  already  obsolete.  Lord 
Kimberley  had  proceeded  on  exactly  the  opposite 
principle,  and  Lord  Carnarvon's  object  in  pushing 
Federation  was  certainly  not  to  diminish  the  area 
of  the  British  Empire. 

If  Froude  talked  in  South  Africa  as  he  wrote  in 
his  journal,  his  conversation  must  have  been  more 
interesting  than  discreet.  "  Every  one,"  he  wrote 
from  Port  Elizabeth,  on  the  27th  of  September, 
1874,  "  approves  of  the  action  of  the  Natal  Govern- 
ment in  the  Langalibalele  affair.  I  am  told  that  if 
Natal  is  irritated  it  may  petition  to  relinquish 
the  British  connection,  and  to  be  allowed  to  join 
the  Free  States.  I  cannot  but  think  that  it  would 
have  been  a  wise  policy,  when  the  Free  States 
were  thrown  off,  to  have  attached  Natal  to  them." 
Lord  Carnarvon  disapproved  of  the  Natal  Govern- 
ment's action,  released  Langalibalele,  and  recalled 
the  Lieut enant-Governor.  His  policy  was  as  wise 
as  it  was  courageous,  and  no  proposal  to  relinquish 
the  British  connection  followed.  Froude  was  a 
firm  believer  in  the  Dutch  method  of  dealing 
with  Kaffirs,  and  he  had  no  more  prejudice  against 
slavery  than  Carlyle  himself.  But  his  sense  of 
justice  was  offended  by  the  treatment  of  Langali- 
balele, and  if  he  had  been  Secretary  of  State  he 
would  have  done  as  Lord  Carnarvon  did.  With 
the  Boers  Froude  had  a  good  deal  of  sympathy. 
Their  religion,  a  purer  Calvinism  than  existed  even 


SOUTH   AFRICA  259 

in  Scotland,  appealed  to  his  deepest  sentiments, 
and  he  admired  the  austere  simplicity  of  their 
lives.  No  one  could  accuse  a  Cape  Dutchman 
of  complicity  in  such  horrors  as  progress  and  the 
march  of  intellect.  On  his  way  from  Cape  Town 
to  Durban  Froude  was  told  a  characteristic 
story  of  a  Dutch  farmer.  "  His  estate  adjoined 
the  Diamond  Fields.  Had  he  remained  where  he 
was,  he  could  have  made  a  large  fortune.  Milk, 
butter,  poultry,  eggs,  vegetables,  fruit,  went  up 
to  fabulous  prices.  The  market  was  his  own  to 
demand  what  he  pleased.  But  he  was  disgusted 
at  the  intrusion  upon  his  solitude.  The  diggers 
worried  him  from  morning  to  night,  demanding 
to  buy,  while  he  required  his  farm  produce 
for  his  own  family.  He  sold  his  land,  in  his 
impatience,  for  a  tenth  of  what  he  might  have  got 
had  he  cared  to  wait  and  bargain,  mounted  his 
wife  and  children  into  his  waggon,  and  moved  off 
into  the  wilderness."  Froude's  sarcastic  com- 
ment is  not  less  characteristic  than  the  story. 
"  Which  was  the  wisest  man,  the  Dutch  farmer 
or  the  Yankee  who  was  laughing  at  him  ?  The 
only  book  that  the  Dutchman  had  ever  read  was 
the  Bible,  and  he  knew  no  better." 

The  state  of  Natal,  which  was  then  perplexing 
the  Colonial  Office,  puzzled  Froude  still  more. 
Four  courses  seemed  to  him  possible.  Natal 
might  be  annexed  to  Cape  Colony,  made  a  pro- 
vince of  a  South  African  Federation,  governed 

1  Short  Studies,  iii.  497. 


260  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

despotically  b}f  a  soldier,  or  left  to  join  the  Dutch 
Republics.  The  fifth  course,  which  was  actually 
taken,  of  giving  it  responsible  government  by 
stages,  did  not  come  within  the  scope  of  his  ideas. 
The  difficulty  of  Federation  lay,  as  it  seemed  to 
him,  in  the  native  problem. 

"If  we  can  make  up  our  minds  tc  allow  the 
colonists  to  manage  the  natives  their  own  way, 
we  may  safely  confederate  the  whole  country. 
The  Dutch  will  be  in  the  majority,  and  the  Dutch 
method  of  management  will  more  or  less  prevail. 
They  will  be  left  wholly  to  themselves  for  self- 
defence,  and  prudence  will  prevent  them  from 
trying  really  harsh  or  aggressive  measures.  In 
other  respects  the  Dutch  are  politically  conserva- 
tive, and  will  give  us  little  trouble."  If,  on  the 
other  hand,  native  policy  was  to  be  directed  from 
home,  or,  in  other  words,  if  adequate  precautions 
were  to  be  taken  against  slavery,  a  federal  system 
would  be  useless,  and  South  Africa  must  be 
governed  like  an  Indian  province. 

Pretoria  Froude  found  full  of  English,  loudly 
demanding  annexation.  He  told  them,  speaking 
of  course  only  for  himself,  that  it  was  impos- 
sible, because  the  Cape  was  a  sell-governing 
Colony,  and  the  Dutch  majority  "  would  take 
any  violence  offered  to  their  kinsmen  in  the 
Republics  as  an  injury  to  themselves."  To  an- 
nexation without  violence,  by  consent  of  the 
Boers,  the  great  obstacle,  so  Froude  found,  was 
the  seizure,  the  fraudulent  seizure,  as  they  thought 


SOUTH   AFRICA  261 

it,  of  the  Diamond  Fields.  He  visited  Kimberley, 
called  after  the  Colonial  Secretary  who  acquired 
it,  "  like  a  squalid  Wimbledon  Camp  set  down  in 
an  arid  desert."  The  method  of  digging  for 
diamonds  was  then  primitive. 

"  Each  owner  works  by  himself  or  with  his  own 
servants.  He  has  his  own  wire  rope,  and  his 
own  basket,  by  which  he  sends  his  stuff  to  the 
surface  to  be  washed.  The  rim  of  the  pit  is 
fringed  with  windlasses.  The  descending  wire 
ropes  stretch  from  them  thick  as  gossamers  on 
an  autumn  meadow.  The  system  is  as  demoralis- 
ing as  it  is  ruinous.  The  owner  cannot  be  ubiquit- 
ous :  if  he  is  with  his  working  cradle,  his  servants 
in  the  pit  steal  his  most  valuable  stones  and  secrete 
them.  Forty  per  cent,  of  the  diamonds  discovered 
are  supposed  to  be  lost  in  this  way."  The  pro- 
portion of  profit  between  employer  and  employed 
seems  to  have  been  fairer  than  usual,  though 
it  might,  no  doubt,  have  been  more  regularly 
arranged. 

At  Bloemfontein  Froude  called  on  President 
Brand,  "  a  resolute,  stubborn-looking  man,  with 
a  frank,  but  not  over-conciliatory,  expression  of 
face."  Brand  was  in  no  conciliatory  mood.  He 
held  that  his  country  had  been  robbed  of  land 
which  the  British  Government  renounced  in  1854, 
and  only  resumed  now  because  diamonds  had  been 
discovered  on  it.  The  interview,  however,  was 
neither  unimportant  nor  unsatisfactory.  It  was 

1  Short  Studies,  vol.  iii.  p.  537. 


262  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

followed  by  an  invitation  to  dinner,  and  frank 
discussion  of  the  whole  subject.  So  firmly  con- 
vinced was  Froude  of  the  President's  good  faith 
and  of  the  injustice  done  him  that  he  pleaded  the 
cause  of  the  Free  State  with  the  Colonial  Office, 
and  Lord  Carnarvon  settled  the  dispute  in  a 
friendly  manner  by  the  payment  of  a  reasonable 
sum.1  But  that  was  not  till  1876,  after  Brand  had 
visited  London,  and  seen  Lord  Carnarvon  himself. 
At  the  end  of  1874  Froude  returned  to  England, 
and  reported  to  Lord  Carnarvon  what  he  had 
observed.  The  Colonial  Secretary,  just,  but  punc- 
tilious, was  unwilling  to  reverse  Lord  Kimberley's 
policy,  and  Froude  discovered  that  party  politics, 
to  which  he  traced  all  our  woes,  had  much  less 
to  do  with  administration  than  he  imagined. 
Under  the  influence  of  Bishop  Colenso,  an  intrepid 
friend  of  the  natives,  Lord  Carnarvon  had  already 
interfered  on  behalf  of  Langalibalele,  but  that 
only  involved  overruling  the  Government  of 
Natal.  After  mature  consideration  he  wrote  a 
despatch  to  Sir  Henry  Barkly  in  which  stress  was 
laid  upon  the  importance  of  arranging  all  differen- 
ences  with  the  Orange  State.  Then  he  proceeded 
to  the  subject  of  Federation,  which  was  always 
in  his  mind  and  at  his  heart.  Here  he  unfortu- 
nately failed  to  make  allowance  for  the  sensitive 
pride  of  Colonial  statesmen.  He  proposed  the 
assemblage  of  a  Federal  Conference  at  Cape 
Town,  at  which  Froude  would  represent  the 

1  £90,000. 


SOUTH  AFRICA  263 

Colonial  Office.  For  Cape  Colony  he  suggested 
the  names  of  the  Prime  Minister,  Molteno,  and  of 
Paterson,  who  led  the  Opposition. 

In  June,  1875,  Froude  went  back  to  South  Africa, 
this  time  as  an  acknowledged  emissary  of  the 
Government,  but  by  ill  luck  his  arrival  coincided 
with  the  receipt  of  the  despatch.  The  effect  of 
this  document  was  prodigious.  Molteno  considered 
that  he  had  been  personally  insulted.  The  Legisla- 
tive Assembly  was  defiant,  and  greeted  the  recital 
of  Carnarvon's  words  with  ironical  laughter.  A 
Ministerial  Minute,  signed  by  Molteno  and  his 
colleagues,  protested  against  the  Colonial  Secre- 
tary's intrusion,  and  especially  against  his  rather 
ill  advised  reference  to  a  proposed  separation  of 
the  eastern  from  the  western  provinces  of  the 
Cape.  It  was  a  fact  that  Port  Elizabeth  and 
Grahamstown,  where  there  were  very  few  Dutch, 
considered  that  they  paid  proportionately  too 
much  towards  the  colonial  revenues,  and  desired 
separate  treatment.  But  the  people  of  Cape 
Town  strongly  objected,  and  it  was  unwise  for 
the  Secretary  of  State  to  take  a  side  in  local 
politics.  Froude  found  his  position  by  no  means 
agreeable.  Molteno,  though  never  discourteous, 
received  him  coldly,  and  objected  to  his  making 
speeches.  The  Governor,  who  liked  to  be  good 
friends  with  his  Ministers,  gave  him  no  encourage- 
ment. The  House  of  Assembly,  after  proposing 
to  censure  Carnarvon  in  their  haste,  censured 
Froude  at  their  leisure.  That  did  him  no  harm. 


264  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

But  he  disliked  the  new  position  in  which  he 
found  himself,  and  in  his  private  journal  he 
expressed  his  sentiments  freely. 

He  had  not  been  long  in  Cape  Town  when  he 
wrote,  on  the  gth  of  July,  1875,  to  his  eldest  daughter 
a  full  and  vivid  account  of  the  political  situation. 
;<  I  am  glad,"  he  said,  "  that  no  one  is  with  me 
who  cares  for  me.  No  really  good  thing  can  be 
carried  out  without  disturbing  various  interests. 
The  Governor  and  Parliament  have  set  themselves 
against  Lord  Carnarvon.  The  whole  country 
has  declared  itself  enthusiastically  for  him.  The 
consequence  is  that  the  opposition,  who  are 
mortified  and  enragqd,  now  daily  pour  every  sort 
of  calumny  on  my  unfortunate  head.  I  don't 
read  more  of  it  than  I  can  help,  but  some  things 
I  am  forced  to  look  at  in  order  to  ansv»  _T  ;  and 
the  more  successful  my  mission  promises  to  be, 
the  more  violent  and  unscrupulous  become  those 
whose  pockets  are  threatened  by  it.  I  wait  in 
Cape  Town  till  the  next  English  steamer  arrives, 
and  then  I  mean  o  start  for  a  short  tour  in  the 
neighbourhood.  I  shall  make  my  way  by  land 
to  Mossel  Bay,  and  then  go  on  by  sea  to  Port 
Elizabeth  and  Natal,  where  I  shall  wait  for  orders 
from  home.  Sir  Garnet l  has  written  me  a  very 
affectionate  letter,  inviting  me  to  stay  with  him. 
Here  the  authorities  begin  to  be  more  respectful 
than  they  were.  Last  night  there  was  a  State 
Dinner  at  Government  House,  when  I  took  in 

1  The  present  Lord  Wolseley. 


SOUTH   AFRICA  265 

Lady  Barkly.  Miss  Barkly  would  hardly  speak 
to  me.  I  don't  wonder.  She  is  devoted  to  her 
father ;  I  would  do  exactly  the  same  in  her  place. 
I  sent  you  a  paper  with  an  account  of  the  dinner, 
and  my  speech,  but  you  must  not  think  that  the 
dinner  represented  Cape  Town  society  generally. 
Cape  Town  society,  up  to  the  reception  at  Govern- 
ment House,  has  regarded  me  as  some  portentous 
object  come  here  to  set  the  country  on  fire,  and 
to  be  regarded  with  tremors  by  all  respectable 
people.  Outside  Cape  Town,  on  the  contrary,  in 
every  town  in  the  country,  Dutch  or  English,  I 
should  be  carried  through  the  streets  on  the 
people's  shoulders  if  I  would  only  allow  it,  so 
you  see  I  am  in  an  '  unexampled  situation.' J  The 
Governor's  dinner  cards  had  on  them  '  to  meet 
Mr.  Froude.'  I  am  told  that  no  less  than  eight 
people  who  were  invited  refused  in  mere  terror 
of  me.  .  .  .  Things  are  in  a  wild  state  here,  and 
grow  daily  wilder.  I  am  responsible  for  having 
lighted  the  straw;  and  if  Lord  Carnarvon  has  been 
frightened  at  the  first  bad  news,  there  will  be 
danger  of  real  disturbance.  The  despatch  has 
created  a  real  enthusiasm,  and  excited  hopes 
which  must  not  now  be  disappointed."  "  Never," 
he  wrote  a  few  weeks  afterwards,  "  never  did  a  man 
of  letters  volunteer  into  a  more  extraordinary  posi- 
tion than  that  in  which  I  find  myself."  Sir  Garnet 
Wolseley  stood  by  him  through  thick  and  thin. 
After  Sir  Garnet's  departure  he  had  no  English 

1  A  favourite  expression  with  Mrs.  Carlyle. 


266  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

friend.  His  local  supporters  were  "  all  looking 
out  for  themselves,"  and  there  was  not  one  among 
them  in  whom  he  could  feel  any  real  confidence." 
Of  Molteno  he  made  no  personal  complaint, 
and  he  always  considered  him  the  fittest  man 
for  his  post  in  South  Africa.  But  Colonial 
politicians  as  a  whole  were  "  not  gentlemen  with 
whom  it  was  agreeable  to  be  forced  into  contact." 
To  give  the  Colony  responsible  government  had 
been  "  an  act  of  deliberate  insanity "  on  the 
part  of  Lord  Kimberley  and  the  Liberal  Cabinet. 
Froude  endeavoured  loyally  and  faithfully  to 
carry  out  the  policy  of  the  Colonial  Office, 
and  his  relations  with  Lord  Carnarvon  were 
relations  of  unbroken  confidence.  His  objects 
were  purely  unselfish  and  patriotic.  It  was  his 
misfortune  rather  than  his  fault  to  become  in- 
volved in  local  politics,  from  which  it  was  essential 
for  the  success  of  his  mission  that  he  should  keep 
entirely  aloof.  Circumstances  brought  him  into 
much  greater  favour  with  the  Dutch  than  with 
his  own  countrymen,  for  it  was  thought,  not 
without  reason,  that  he  had  brought  Carnarvon 
round  to  see  the  truth  about  the  Diamond  Fields 
and  the  Free  State.  He  made  them  speeches, 
and  they  received  him  with  enthusiasm.  With 
Molteno,  on  the  other  hand,  he  found  it  impossible 
to  act,  and  the  Governor  supported  Molteno. 
Barkly  was  not  unfavourable  to  Federation.  But 
he  perceived  that  it  could  not  be  forced  upon  a 
self-governing  Colony,  and  that  he  himself  would 


SOUTH  AFRICA  267 

be  powerless  unless  he  acted  in  harmony  with  his 
constitutional  advisers.  He,  as  well  as  Molteno, 
refused  to  attend  the  dinner  at  which  Froude  on 
his  arrival  was  entertained  in  Cape  Town.  Molteno 
advised  Froude  not  to  go,  or  if  he  went,  not  to 
speak.  Froude,  however,  both  went  and  spoke, 
claiming  as  an  Englishman  the  right  of  free  speech 
in  a  British  Colony.  The  right  was  of  course 
incontestable.  The  expediency  was  a  very  differ- 
ent matter.  Froude  was  not  accustomed  to 
public  speaking,  and  only  long  experience  can 
teach  that  most  difficult  part  of  the  process, 
the  instinctive  avoidance  of  what  should  not  be 
said.  His  brilliant  lectures  were  all  read  from 
manuscript,  and  he  had  never  been  in  the  habit 
of  thinking  on  his  legs.  In  1874  he  could  at  least 
say  that  he  spoke  only  for  himself.  In  1875  he 
committed  the  Colonial  Office,  and  even  the 
Cabinet,  to  his  own  personal  opinions,  which  were 
not  in  favour  of  Parliamentary  Government  as 
understood  either  by  Englishmen  or  by  Afri- 
canders. He  was  accused  of  getting  up  a  popular 
agitation  on  behalf  of  the  Imperial  authorities 
against  the  Governor  of  the  Colony,  his  Ministers, 
and  the  Legislative  Assembly  of  the  Cape.  He 
did  in  fact,  under  a  strong  sense  of  duty,  urge 
Carnarvon  to  recall  Barkly,  and  to  substitute  for 
him  Sir  Garnet  Wolseley,  who  had  temporarily 
taken  over  the  administration  of  Natal. 

Sir  Garnet,  however,   had  no  such  ambition. 
Soldiering  was  the  business  of  his  life,  and  he  had 


368  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

had  quite  enough  of  constitutionalism  in  Natal. 
Barkly  was  for  the  present  maintained,  and 
Froude  regarded  his  maintenance  as  fatal  to 
Federation.  But  Sir  Bartle  Frere,  who  suc- 
ceeded him,  was  not  more  fortunate,  and  the  real 
mistake  was  interference  from  home.  To  Froude 
his  experience  of  South  Africa  came  as  a  dis- 
agreeable shock.  A  passionate  believer  in  Greater 
Britain,  in  the  expansion  of  England,  in  the 
energy,  resources,  and  prospects  of  the  Queen's 
dominions  beyond  the  seas,  the  parochialism  of 
Cape  Colony  astonished  and  perplexed  him.  While 
he  was  dreaming  of  a  Federated  Empire,  Molteno 
and  Paterson  were  counting  heads  in  the  Cape 
Assembly,  and  considering  what  would  be  the 
political  result  if  the  eastern  provinces  set  up  for 
themselves.  If  South  Africa  were  federated, 
would  Cape  Town  remain  the  seat  of  government  ? 
To  Froude  such  a  question  was  paltry  and  trivial. 
To  a  Cape  Town  shopkeeper  it  loomed  as  large 
as  Table  Mountain.  The  attitude  of  Molteno' s 
Ministry,  on  the  other  hand,  seemed  as  ominous 
to  him  as  it  seemed  obvious  to  the  Colonists. 
He  thought  it  fatal  to  the  unity  of  the  Empire, 
and  amounting  to  absolute  independence.  He 
did  not  understand  the  people  with  whom  he  had 
to  deal.  Most  of  them  were  as  loyal  subjects 
as  himself,  and  never  contemplated  for  a  moment 
secession  from  the  Empire.  All  they  claimed 
was  complete  freedom  to  manage  their  own  affairs, 
to  federate  or  not  to  federate,  as  they  pleased 


SOUTH  AFRICA  269 

and  when  they  pleased.  They  had  only  just 
acquired  full  constitutional  rights;  and  if  they 
sometimes  exaggerated  the  effect  of  them,  the  error 
was  venial.  If  Carnarvon,  instead  of  writing  for 
publication  an  elaborate  and  official  despatch, 
had  explained  his  policy  to  the  Governor  in  private 
letters,  and  directed  him  to  sound  Molteno  in 
confidence,  the  Cape  Ministers  might  themselves 
have  proposed  a  scheme ;  and  if  they  had  proposed 
it,  it  would  have  been  carried.  Had  Froude  said 
nothing  at  dinners,  or  on  platforms,  he  might 
have  exercised  far  more  influence  behind  the 
scenes.  But  he  was  an  enthusiast  for  Federation 
by  means  of  a  South  African  Conference,  and  he 
made  a  proselytising  tour  through  the  Colony. 
The  Dutch  welcomed  him  because  he  acknow- 
ledged their  rights.  At  Grahamstown  too,  and 
at  Port  Elizabeth,  he  was  hailed  as  the  champion 
of  separation  for  the  eastern  provinces.  The 
Legislative  Assembty  at  Cape  Town,  however,  was 
hostile,  and  the  proposed  conference  fell  through. 
Lord  Carnarvon  did  not  see  the  full  significance 
of  the  fact  that  the  Confederation  of  Canada  had 
been  first  mooted  within  the  Dominion  itself. 

An  interesting  account  of  Froude  at  this  time 
has  been  given  by  Sir  George  Colley,  the  brilliant 
and  accomplished  soldier  whose  career  was  cut 
short  six  years  afterwards  at  Majuba  : 

"  I  came  home  from  the  Cape,  and  almost  lived 
on  the  way  with  Mr.  Froude.  ...  It  was  rather 
a  sad  mind,  sometimes  grand,  sometimes  pathetic 


270  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

and  tender,  usually  cynical,  but  often  relating  with 
the  highest  appreciation,  and  with  wonderful 
beauty  of  language,  some  gallant  deed  of  some  of 
his  heroes  of  the  fifteenth  or  sixteenth  centuries. 
He  seemed  to  have  gone  through  every  phase  of 
thought,  and  come  to  the  end  '  All  is  vanity.' 
He  himself  used  to  say  the  interest  of  life  to  a 
thinking  man  was  exhausted  at  thirty,  or  thirty- 
five.  After  that  there  remained  nothing  but 
disappointment  of  earlier  visions  and  hopes. 
Sometimes  there  was  something  almost  fearful 
in  the  gloom,  and  utter  disbelief,  and  defiance  of 
his  mind."  l 

The  picture  is  a  sombre  one.  But  it  must  be 
remembered  that  the  death  of  his  wife  was  still 
weighing  heavily  upon  Froude. 

A  few  days  after  his  return  to  London  Froude 
wrote  a  long  and  interesting  Report  to  the  Secre- 
tary of  State,  which  was  laid  before  Parliament 
in  due  course.  Few  documents  more  thoroughly 
unofficial  have  ever  appeared  in  a  Blue  Book. 
The  excellence  of  the  paper  as  a  literary  essay 
is  conspicuous.  But  its  chief  value  lies  in  the 
impression  produced  by  South  African  politics 
upon  a  penetrating  and  observant  mind  trained 
under  wholly  different  conditions.  Froude  would 
not  have  been  a  true  disciple  of  Carlyle  if  he  had 
felt  or  expressed  much  sympathy  with  the  native 
race.  He  wanted  them  to  be  comfortable.  For 
freedom  he  did  not  consider  them  fit.  It  was  the 

1  Butler's  Life  of  Colley,  p.  145. 


SOUTH   AFRICA  271 

Boers  who  really  attracted  him,  and  the  man  he 
admired  the  most  in  South  Africa  was  President 
Brand.  The  sketch  of  the  two  Dutch  Republics 
in  his  Report  is  drawn  with  a  very  friendly  hand. 
He  thought,  not  without  reason,  that  they  had 
been  badly  treated.  Their  independence,  which 
they  did  not  then  desire,  had  been  forced 
upon  them  by  Lord  Grey  and  the  Duke  of  New- 
castle. The  Sand  River  Convention  of  1852,  and 
the  Orange  River  Convention  of  1854,  resulted 
from  British  desire  to  avoid  future  responsibility 
outside  Cape  Colony  and  Natal.  As  for  the  Dutch 
treatment  of  the  Kaffirs,  it  had  never  in  Froude's 
opinion  been  half  so  bad  as  Pine's  treatment  of 
Langalibalele.  By  the  second  article  of  the 
Orange  River  Convention,  renewed  and  ratified 
at  Aliwal  after  the  Basuto  war  in  1869,  Her 
Majesty's  Government  promised  not  to  make 
any  agreement  with  native  chiefs  north  of  the 
Vaal  River.  Yet,  when  diamonds  were  discovered 
north  of  the  Vaal  in  Griqualand  West,  the  territory 
was  purchased  by  Lord  Kimberley  from  Nicholas 
Waterboer,  without  the  consent,  and  notwith- 
standing the  protests,  of  the  Orange  Free  State. 
But  although  Lord  Kimberley  assented  to  the 
annexation  of  Griqualand  West  in  1871,  he  only 
did  so  on  the  distinct  understanding  that  Cape 
Colony  would  undertake  to  administer  the  Diamond 
Fields,  and  this  the  Cape  Ministers  refused  to  do, 
lest  they  should  offend  their  Dutch  constituents. 
It  was  not  till  1878,  when  all  differences  with 


272  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

the  Free  State  had  been  settled,  and  the  Transvaal 
was  a  British  possession,  that  Griqualand  West 
became  an  integral  part  of  Cape  Colony.  In 
January,  1876,  Brand  was  still  asking  for  arbitra- 
tion, and  Carnarvon  was  still  refusing  it. 

When  he  explained  the  Colonial  Secretary's 
policy  to  the  Colonial  Secretary  himself  Froude 
came  very  near  explaining  it  away.  The  Con- 
ference, he  said,  was  only  intended  to  deal  with  the 
native  question  and  the  question  of  Griqualand. 
Was  Confederation  then  a  dream  ?  Froude  himself, 
in  a  private  letter  to  Molteno,  dated  April  29th, 
1875,  wrote,  "  Lord  Carnarvon's  earnest  desire 
since  he  came  into  office  has  been  if  possible  to 
form  South  Africa  into  a  confederate  dominion, 
with  complete  internal  self-government."  That 
was  the  whole  object  of  the  Conference,  which 
but  for  that  would  never  have  been  proposed. 
That,  as  Froude  truly  says  in  his  Report,  was 
one  of  Molteno's  reasons  for  resisting  it.  The 
Cape  Premier  thought  that  South  Africa  was 
not  ripe  for  Confederation.  If  Froude  had  had 
more  practice  in  drawing  up  official  documents, 
he  would  probably  have  left  out  this  depreca- 
tory argument,  which  does  not  agree  with  the 
rest  of  his  case.  He  attributes,  for  instance, 
to  local  politicians  a  dread  that  the  supremacy 
of  Cape  Town  would  be  endangered.  But  no 
possible  treatment  of  the  natives,  or  of  Griqualand 
West,  would  have  endangered  the  supremacy  of 

1  Life  of  Molteno,  vol.  i.  p.  337. 


SOUTH  AFRICA  273 

Cape  Town.  The  Confederation  of  which  Froude 
and  Carnarvon  were  champions  would  have 
avoided  tremendous  calamities  if  it  could  have 
been  carried  out.  The  chief  difficulties  in  its 
way  were  Colonial  jealousy  of  interference  from 
Downing  Street  and  Dutch  exasperation  at  the 
seizure  of  the  Diamond  Fields.  "  You  have 
trampled  on  those  poor  States,  sir,"  said  a  member 
of  the  Cape  Legislature  to  Froude,  "  till  the  country 
cries  shame  upon  you,  and  you  come  now  to  us 
to  assist  you  in  your  tyranny  ;  we  will  not  do  it, 
sir.  We  are  astonished  that  you  should  dare  to 
ask  us."  Such  language  was  singularly  inappro- 
priate to  Froude  himself,  for  the  Boers  never  had 
a  warmer  advocate  than  they  had  in  him.  But 
the  circumstances  in  which  Griqualand  West  were 
annexed  will  excuse  a  good  deal  of  strong  language. 
At  Port  Elizabeth  and  Grahamstown  Froude  was 
welcomed  as  an  advocate  of  their  local  indepen- 
dence, which  was  what  they  most  desired.  When, 
with  unusual  prudence,  he  declined  to  take  part 
in  a  separatist  campaign,  their  zeal  for  Confedera- 
tion soon  cooled.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Dutch 
papers  all  supported  the  Conference,  although 
Brand  refused  to  lay  his  case  before  it,  or  to  treat 
with  any  authority  except  the  British  Government 
at  home. 

Neither  Froude  nor  Carnarvon  made  sufficient 
allowance  for  Colonial  independence  and  the  suscep- 
tibilities of  Colonial  Ministers.  Many  of  Froude's 
expressions  in  public  were  imprudent,  and  he 

(3310)  18 


274  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

himself  in  his  Report  apologised  for  his  unguarded 
language  at  Grahamstown,  where  he  said  that 
Molteno's  reply  to  Carnarvon's  despatch  would  have 
meant  war  if  it  had  come  from  a  foreign  state. 
Yet  in  the  main  their  policy  was  a  wise  one,  and 
they  saw  farther  ahead  than  the  men  who  worked 
the  political  machine  at  Cape  Town.  Froude  was 
too  sanguine  when  he  wrote,  "  A  Confederate 
South  African  Dominion,  embracing  all  the  States, 
both  English  and  Dutch,  under  a  common  flag, 
may  be  expected  as  likely  to  follow,  and  perhaps 
at  no  very  distant  period."  But  he  added  that 
it  would  have  to  come  by  the  deliberate  action 
of  the  South  African  communities  themselves. 
That  was  not  the  only  discovery  he  had  made  in 
South  Africa.  He  had  found  that  the  Transvaal, 
reputed  then  and  long  afterwards  in  England  to 
be  worthless,  was  rich  in  minerals,  including  gold. 
He  warned  the  Colonial  Office  that  Cetewayo, 
with  forty  thousand  armed  men,  was  a  serious 
danger  to  Natal.  He  saw  clearly,  and  said  plainly, 
that  unless  South  Africa  was  to  be  despotically 
governed,  it  must  be  administered  with  the  consent 
and  approval  of  the  Dutch.  He  dwelt  strongly 
upon  the  danger  of  allowing  and  encouraging 
natives  to  procure  arms  in  Griqualand  West  as 
an  enticement  to  work  for  the  diamond  mine 
owners.  The  secret  designs  of  Sir  Theophilus 
Shepstone  he  did  not  penetrate,  and  therefore 
he  was  unprepared  for  the  next  development 
in  the  South  African  drama.  The  South  African 


SOUTH   AFRICA  275 

Conference  in  London,  which  he  attended  during 
August,  1876,  led  to  no  useful  result  because 
Molteno,  though  he  had  come  to  London,  and 
was  discussing  the  affairs  of  Griqualand  with 
Lord  Carnarvon,  refused  to  attend  it.  This 
was  the  end  of  South  African  Confederation,  and 
the  permissive  Act  of  1877,  passed  after  the 
Transvaal  had  been  annexed,  remained  a  dead 
letter  on  the  Statute  Book. 

Although  the  immediate  purpose  of  Froude's 
visits  to  South  Africa  was  not  attained,  it  would 
be  a  mistake  to  infer  that  they  had  no  results  at 
all.  Early  in  1877  the  annexation  of  the  Transvaal, 
to  which  Froude  was  strongly  opposed,  changed 
the  whole  aspect  of  affairs,  and  from  that  time  the 
strongest  opponents  of  Federalism  were  the  Dutch. 
But  the  credit  of  settling  with  the  Orange  Free 
State  a  dispute  which  might  have  led  to  infinite 
mischief  is  as  much  Froude's  as  Carnarvon's,  and 
as  a  consequence  of  their  wise  conduct  President 
Brand  became  for  the  rest  of  his  life  a  steady 
friend  to  the  British  power  in  South  Africa, 
Ninety  thousand  pounds  was  a  small  price  to  pay 
for  the  double  achievement  of  reconciling  a  model 
State  and  wiping  out  a  stain  upon  England's 
honour. 

More  than  four  years  after  his  second  return 
from  South  Africa,  in  January,  1880,  Froude 
delivered  two  lectures  to  the  Philosophical  Society 
of  Edinburgh,  in  which  his  view  of  South  African 
policy  is  with  perfect  clearness  set  forth.  He 


276  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

condemns  the  annexation  of  the  Transvaal,  and 
the  Zulu  war.  He  expresses  a  wish  that  Lord 
Carnarvon,  who  had  resigned  two  years  before, 
could  be  permanent  Secretary  for  the  Colonies. 
"  I  would  give  back  the  Transvaal  to  the  Dutch," 
he  said.  Again,  in  even  more  emphatic  language, 
"  The  Transvaal,  in  spite  of  prejudices  about  the 
British  flag,  I  still  hope  that  we  shall  return  to  its 
lawful  owners."  l  What  is  more  surprising,  he 
recommended  that  Zululand  should  be  restored  to 
Cetewayo,  or  Cetewayo  to  Zululand.  He  had 
predicted  in  1875  that  Cetewayo  would  prove  a 
troublesome  person,  and  few  men  had  less  of  the 
sentiment  which  used  to  be  associated  with  Exeter 
Hall.  The  restoration  of  Cetewayo,  when  it  came, 
was  disastrous  both  to  himself  and  to  others. 
Frere  understood  the  Zulus  better  than  Froude  or 
Colenso.  The  surrender  of  the  Transvaal,  which 
was  a  good  deal  nearer  than  Froude  thought, 
was  at  least  successful  for  a  time,  a  longer  time 
than  Froude' s  own  life.  He  did  not  share  Glad- 
stone's ignorance  of  its  value;  he  knew  it  to  be 
rich  in  minerals,  especially  in  gold.  But  he  knew 
also  that  Carnarvon  had  been  deceived  about  the 
willingness  of  the  inhabitants  to  become  British 
subjects,  and  he  sympathised  with  their  Puritan 
independence.  It  illustrates  his  own  fairness  and 
detachment  of  mind  that  he  should  have  taken  so 
strong  and  so  unpopular  a  line  when  the  Boers 
were  generally  supposed  in  England  to  have 

1  Two  Lectures  on  South  Africa,  pp.  80,  81,  85. 


SOUTH  AFRICA  277 

acquiesced  in  the  loss  of  their  liberties,  and  when 
his  hero  Sir  Garnet  Wolseley,  to  whom  he  dedi- 
cated his  English  in  Ireland,  had  declared  that 
the  Vaal  would  run  back  to  the  Drakensberg 
before  the  British  flag  ceased  to  wave  over 
Pretoria. 

Froude's  South  African  policy  was  to  work 
with  the  Dutch,  and  keep  the  natives  in  their 
places.  He  had  no  personal  interest  in  the 
question.  It  was  through  Lord  Carnarvon  that 
he  came  in  contact  with  South  Africa  at  all,  and 
there  were  few  statesmen  with  whom  he  more 
thoroughly  agreed.  When  Disraeli  came  for  the 
second  time  into  office,  and  for  the  first  time  into 
power,  Froude  was  well  pleased. 

In  1875,  after  his  legal  disqualification  had  been 
removed,  he  was  again  invited  to  become  a  candi- 
date for  Parliament.  But  he  did  not  really  know 
to  which  party  he  belonged. 

u  Four  weeks  ago/'  he  wrote  to  Lady  Derby  on 
the  3rd  of  April,  "  the  Liberal  Whip  (Mr.  Adam) 
asked  me  to  stand  for  the  Glasgow  and  Aberdeen 
Universities  on  very  easy  terms  to  myself.  I 
declined,  because  I  should  have  had  to  commit 
myself  to  the  Liberal  party,  which  I  did  not  choose 
to  do.  Lord  Carnarvon  afterwards  spoke  to  me 
with  regret  at  my  resolution.  He  had  a  conversa- 
tion with  Mr.  D' Israeli,  and  it  was  agreed  that  if 
possible  I  should  be  brought  in  by  a  compromise 
without  a  contest.  But  it  appeared  doubtful 
afterwards  whether  the  Liberals  would  consent  to 


278  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

this  without  fuller  pledges  than  I  could  consent  to 
give.  I  was  asked  if  I  would  stand  anyhow 
(contest  or  not),  or  whether  I  would  allow  myself 
to  be  nominated  in  their  interest  for  any  other 
place  when  a  vacancy  should  occur.  I  said,  No. 
(I  would  stand  a  contest  on  the  Conservative  side, 
if  on  any.)  I  was  neither  Conservative  nor  Liberal 
per  se,  but  would  not  oppose  Mr.  D' Israeli.  So 
there  this  matter  lies,  unless  your  people  have  as 
good  an  opinion  of  me  as  the  others,  and  want  a 
candidate  of  my  lax  description.  But  indeed  I 
have  no  wish  to  go  into  Parliament.  I  am  too 
old  to  begin  a  Parliamentary  life,  and  infinitely 
prefer  making  myself  of  use  to  the  Conservative 
side  in  some  other  way.  ...  I  am  at  Lord  Car- 
narvon's service  if  he  wishes  me  to  go  on  with 
his  Colonial  affairs.  I  came  home  from  the  Cape 
to  be  of  use  to  him." 

The  Colonial  policy  of  the  Liberals  Froude 
had  always  regarded  with  suspicion.  Even  Lord 
Kimberley's  grant  of  a  constitution  to  the  Cape 
he  interpreted  as  showing  a  centrifugal  tendency, 
and  Car  dwell' s  withdrawal  of  troops  from  Canada 
was  all  of  a  piece.  Disraeli,  on  the  other  hand, 
who  never  did  anything  for  the  Colonies,  had 
been  making  a  speech  about  them  at  Manchester, 
wherein  all  manner  of  Colonial  possibilities  were 
suggested.  They  did  not  go,  if  they  were  ever 
intended  to  go,  beyond  suggestion,  and  in  1876 
the  sudden  crisis  in  Eastern  affairs  superseded 
all  other  topics  of  political  interest. 


SOUTH   AFRICA  279 

When  the  Eastern  Question  was  first  raised, 
Froude  had  taken  the  side  of  the  Government. 

"  I  like  Lord  Derby's  speech,"  he  wrote  to  Lady 
Derby  on  the  igth  of  September,  1876,  "  to  the 
Working  Men's  Association.  So  I  think  the  country 
will  when  it  recovers  from  its  present  intoxication. 
Violent  passions  which  rise  suddenly  generally 
sink  as  fast  if  there  is  no  real  reason  for  them.  It 
is  impossible  that  the  people  can  fail  to  recollect 
in  a  little  while  that  the  reticence  of  which  they 
complain  is  under  the  circumstances  inevitable. 

"  Gladstone  and  his  satellites  are  using  their 
opportunities,  however,  with  thorough  unscrupu- 
lousness.  It  is  possible  that  they  may  force  an 
Autumn  Session,  and  even  force  the  Ministry  to 
resign — but  woe  to  themselves  if  they  do.  They 
will  promise  what  cannot  be  carried  out,  and  will 
perhaps,  in  fine  retribution  for  the  Crimean  War, 
bring  the  Russians  to  Constantinople.  It  will 
not  be  a  bad  thing  in  itself,  but  there  will  be 
an  end  of  the  English  Minister  who  brings  it 
about." 

Again,  three  days  later,  to  the  same  corre- 
spondent : 

"  I  admire  the  Premier's  speech.  It  is  what  I 
expected  of  him.  The  Liberal  leaders  are  behaving 
scandalously,  with  the  exception  perhaps  of  Lord 
Hartington.  The  Cabinet  I  trust  will  now  decide 
on  an  Autumn  Session  to  remove  so  critical  a 
matter  out  of  the  hands  of  irresponsible  mobs.  I 
was  surprised  to  hear  the  war  in  Servia  attributed 


280  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

to  the  secret  societies.  Cluseret  I  know  has  in- 
tended to  ask  for  service  with  Turkey,  with  a  view 
to  a  war,  against  Russia,  and  has  been  withheld 
only  by  some  differences  with  General  Klapha, 
the  Turco-Hungarian,  from  doing  so.  I  had  a 
long  letter  from  him  to-day,  in  which  he  expresses 
his  restlessness  characteristically,  J'ai  la  nostalgie 
de  la  poudre." 

Afterwards  Froude  followed  Carlyle,  and  went 
with  Russia  against  Turkey.  The  "  unspeakable 
Turk  "  was  to  be  "  struck  out  of  the  question," 
and  Bismarck  invited  to  arbitrate.  Such  was 
the  oracular  deliverance  from  Cheyne  Row,  and 
Froude  obeyed  the  oracle.  He  attended  the 
Conference  at  St.  James's  Hall  in  December, 
at  which  Gladstone  spoke,  and  Carlyle' s  letter 
was  read,  sitting  for  the  only  time  in  his  life 
on  the  same  platform  with  Freeman.  Next 
May,  when  war  between  Russia  and  Turkey  had 
actually  begun,  when  Gladstone  was  about  to  move 
his  famous  resolutions  in  the  House  of  Commons, 
there  appeared  in  The  Times  *  another  remarkable 
letter  from  the  same  hand.  This  time,  however, 
it  was  no  mere  question  of  style,  though  "  our 
miraculous  Premier  "  was  a  phrase  which  stuck. 
Carlyle  evidently  had  information  of  some  design 
for  giving  Turkey  the  support  of  the  British 
fleet  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Constantinople, 
and  was  not  very  discreet  in  the  use  he  made  of 
it.  The  Cabinet  were  supposed  to  be  divided 

1  May  5,   1877. 


SOUTH  AFRICA  281 

on  the  question  of  helping  Turkey  by  material 
means,  which  of  course  meant  war  with  Russia, 
and  the  Foreign  Secretary,  Lord  Derby,  was 
known  to  be  in  favour  of  peace.  A  year  later 
Lord  Carnarvon  and  Lord  Derby  had  both  left 
the  Cabinet  rather  than  be  responsible  for  a 
vote  of  credit  which  meant  preparation  for  war, 
and  for  calling  out  the  Reserves. 

Froude  was  in  complete  sympathy  with  the 
retiring  ministers,  and  he  regarded  it  as  a  pro- 
found mistake  for  England  to  quarrel  with  Russia 
on  behalf  of  a  Power  which  had  no  business  in 
Europe  at  all.  From  his  point  of  view  the 
presence  at  the  Colonial  Office  of  so  sympathetic 
a  Minister  as  Carnarvon  was  far  more  important 
than  the  difference  between  the  Treaty  of  San 
Stefano  and  the  Treaty  of  Berlin.  Of  the  Afghan 
War  in  1878  he  strongly  disapproved. 

The  following  extracts  from  letters  to  Lady 
Derby  show  the  phases  of  thought  on  the  Eastern 
Question  through  which  Froude  passed,  and  are 
interesting  also  because  they  represent  him  in  an 
unfamiliar  light  as  the  champion  of  Parliamentary 
Government  against  the  secret  diplomacy  of  Lord 
Beaconsfield.  Arbitrary  rule  might  be  very 
good  for  Irishmen.  As  applied  to  Englishmen 
Froude  disliked  it  no  less  than  Gladstone  or 
Bright. 

"  February  i6th}  1877. — The  Opposition  have  no 
hope  of  making  a  successful  attack  on  the  present 
Parliament — but  they  are  resolute.  They  know 


282  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

their  own  minds,  and  Gladstone  (I  know)  has  said 
that  he  has  but  to  hold  up  his  finger  to  force  a 
dissolution  and  return  as  Prime  Minister.  I  too 
think  you  are  deceived  by  the  London  Press. 
Another  massacre  and  all  would  be  over.  The 
Golden  Bridge  you  speak  of  I  conclude  is  for 
Russia;  but  if  it  was  possible  for  the  Cabinet, 
without  changing  its  attitude,  to  make  such  a 
bridge,  there  would  be  no  need  of  one.  England 
has  been,  and  I  fear  still  is,  the  one  obstacle  to 
measures  which  would  have  long  ago  brought  the 
Turk  to  his  senses.  I  cannot  but  feel  assured 
that  you  have  thrown  away  an  opportunity  for 
securing  to  the  Conservative  party  the  gratitude 
of  Europe  and  the  possession  of  office  for  a  genera- 
tion. If  more  mischief  happens  in  Turkey  it  will 
be  on  you  that  public  displeasure  will  fall,  and 
you  may  need  a  bridge  for  yourselves  and  not 
find  one.  I  croak  like  a  raven.  Perhaps  you 
may  set  it  down  to  an  almost  totally  sleepless 
night." 

"  April  30^,  1877. — You  destroy  the  last  hope 
to  which  I  had  clung,  that  Lord  Derby,  though 
opposed  to  Russian  policy,  would  not  consent  to 
go  to  war  with  her.  I  remain  of  my  old  opinion 
that  England  (foolishly  excited  as  it  always  is 
when  fighting  is  going  on)  will  in  the  long  run 
resent  the  absurdity  and  punish  the  criminality  of 
taking  arms  in  a  worthless  cause.  I  am  sick  of 
heart  at  the  thought  of  what  is  coming,  here  as  well 
as  on  the  Continent.  I  have  begged  Carlyle  to 


SOUTH  AFRICA  283 

write  a  last  appeal  to  The  Times.  We  must  agitate 
in  the  great  towns,  we  must  protest  against  what 
we  may  be  unable  to  prevent.  The  Crimean  War 
was  innocent  compared  to  what  is  now  threatened, 
yet  three  years  ago  there  was  scarcely  a  person  in 
England  who  did  not  admit  that  it  was  a  mistake. 
I  do  not  know  what  may  be  the  verdict  of  the 
public  about  a  repetition  of  it  at  the  present 
moment.  I  know  but  too  well  what  will  be  the 
verdict  five  years  hence,  and  the  fate  which  will 
overtake  those  who,  with  however  good  a  motive, 
are  courting  the  ruin  of  their  party." 

"  December  zznd,  1877. — The  passion  for  inter- 
ference in  defence  of  the  Turks  seems  limited  (as 
I  was  always  convinced  that  it  was)  to  the  idle 
educated  classes.  The  public  meetings  which  have 
been,  or  are  to  be,  go  the  other  way,  or  at  least  are 
against  our  taking  a  part  on  the  Turkish  side. 
The  demonstrations  which  Lord  B.  expected 
to  follow  on  the  first  Russian  success  have  not 
followed.  The  Telegraph  and  Morning  Post  have 
used  their  whips  on  the  dead  Crimean  horse,  but 
it  will  not  stir  for  them.  It  will  not  stir  even  for 
the  third  volume  of  the  Prince  Consort's  Life.  But 
I  am  very  sorry  about  it  all,  for  the  damage  to 
the  Conservative  party  from  the  lost  opportunity 
of  playing  a  great  and  honourable  part  is,  I  fear, 
irretrievable." 

"  December  2jthy  1877. — The  accounts  from 
Bulgaria  and  Armenia  turn  me  sick.  These  sheep, 
what  have  they  done  ?  Diplomatists  quarrel,  and 


284  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

the  people  suffer.  The  management  of  human 
affairs  will  be  much  improved  when  the  people 
tell  their  respective  Cabinets  that  if  there  is 
fighting  to  be  done  the  Cabinets  must  fight  them- 
selves, and  that  the  result  shall  be  accepted  as 
final.  Nine  out  of  ten  great  wars  might  have 
been  settled  that  way  with  equal  advantage  so  far 
as  the  consequences  were  concerned,  and  to  the 
infinite  relief  of  poor  humanity." 

"  March  loth,  1878.— I  met  Lord  D.  at  the 
club  the  other  night.  He  looked  as  Prometheus 
might  have  looked  when  he  was  '  Unbound.'  He 
was  in  excellent  spirits  and  talked  brilliantly. 
Not  one  allusion  to  the  East,  but  I  guessed  that 
he  had  a  mind  at  ease." 

"  April  8th,  1878. — I  wish  I  knew  whether  the 
Cabinet  has  determined  on  forcing  war  upon 
Russia  at  all  events,  or  if  Russia  consents  to  go 
into  the  Conference  on  the  English  terms  ;  the 
Cabinet  will  then  bona  fide  endeavour  after  an 
equitable  and  honourable  settlement.  Lord  B.'s 
antecedents  all  point  to  a  determination  to  make 
any  settlement  impossible.  He  has  succeeded  so 
far  without  provoking  the  other  Powers,  but  such 
a  game  is  surely  dangerous,  backed  though  he  be 
by  every  fool  and  knave  in  England." 

"  July  i$th,  1878. — I  gather  that  the  Opposition 
is  too  disorganised  to  resist ;  and  if  Parliament 
endure  to  be  set  aside,  and  allow  the  destinies 
of  their  country  to  be  affected  so  enormously  by 
the  sole  action  of  the  Crown  and  the  Cabinet,  a 


SOUTH  AFRICA  285 

change  is  passing  over  us  the  results  of  which  it 
is  impossible  to  estimate.  We  do,  in  fact,  take 
charge  of  the  Turkish  Empire  as  completely  as  we 
took  the  Empire  of  the  Moguls.  In  a  little  while 
we  shall  have  to  administer  on  the  Continent  as 
well  as  in  Cyprus,  and  then  will  arise  a  new  Asiatic 
army.  This  will  bring  wars  with  it  before  long, 
and  a  proportionate  increase  of  the  power  of  the 
Executive  Government.  If  Parliament  abdicates 
its  authority  now,  what  may  we  not  anticipate  ? 
I  have  long  felt  that  the  House  of  Commons  could 
not  long  continue  to  govern  the  great  concerns  of 
the  British  Empire  as  it  has  done.  I  certainly 
did  not  expect  that  it  would  yield  without  a  struggle 
—nor  will  it.  Sooner  or  later  we  shall  see  a  fight 
against  the  tendency  which  is  giving  so  startling 
an  evidence  of  its  existence — and  what  is  to 
happen  then  ?  " 

"  July  2ist,  1878. — Lord  Derby's  speech  was  as 
good  as  it  could  possibly  be.  What  he  says  now 
all  the  world  will  say  two  years  hence.  How 
deeply  it  cut  appeared  plainly  enough  in  the 
scenes  which  followed.  It  must  be  peculiarly 
distressing  to  you — distressing  in  many  ways,  for 
I  feel  as  certain  as  ever  that  the  end  of  it  all  will 
be  irreparable  damage  to  the  Conservative  party. 
One  would  like  to  know  Prince  Bismarck's  private 
opinion  of  the  Premier  and  private  opinion  also 
of  the  nation  which  has  taken  him  for  their  chosen 
leader.  Of  course  he  will  dissolve  while  the 
glamour  is  fresh,  and  before  the  effects  of  the  bad 


286  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

champagne  with  which  he  has  dosed  the  country 
begin  to  appear — first  headache  and  penitence, 
and  then  exasperation  at  the  provider  of  the 
entertainment." 

"  November  24th,  1878. — The  evil  shadow  of  the 
Premier  extends  over  the  most  innocent  of  our 
pleasures.  I  had  been  looking  forward  to  a  few 
days  at  Knowsley  as  the  most  enjoyable  which  I 
should  have  had  during  the  whole  year.  Yet  I 
knew  how  it  would  be.  Daring  as  he  is,  he  could 
not  venture  on  an  entire  defiance  of  public  opinion. 
Parliament  of  course  would  have  to  meet,  and 
equally  of  course  you  and  Lord  D.  would  have 
to  come  up.  I  conclude  the  object  to  be  to  get 
up  a  Russian  war  after  all.  The  stress  laid  by 
Lord  Cranbrook  on  the  reception  of  the  Russian 
Embassy  as  the  point  of  the  injury  will  make  it 
very  difficult  for  the  Russians  to  be  neutral.  If 
this  is  what  the  Ministry  really  intend,  they  may 
have  their  majority  in  Parliament  docile,  but  I 
doubt  whether  they  will  have  the  country  with 
them.  I  am  sure  they  will  not  if  Hartington  and 
Granville  support  Lord  Lawrence. 

"  I  interpret  it  all  as  meaning  that  the  Premier 
knows  that  his  policy  has  thoroughly  broken  down 
in  Europe,  and  at  all  risks  he  means  to  have 
another  try  in  the  East." 

It  was  Froude's  opinion,  right  or  wrong,  that 
Lord  Beaconsfield  might  have  settled  the  Irish 
question  if  he  had  left  the  Eastern  question 


SOUTH   AFRICA  287 

alone.  He  understood  it,  as  some  of  his  early 
speeches  show,  and  he  might  have  "  established 
a  just  Land  Court  with  the  support  of  all  the 
best  land-owners  in  Ireland."  *  Why  the  Land 
Court  established  by  Gladstone  in  1881  was  unjust 
Froude  did  not  explain.  Some  of  the  best  land- 
lords, if  not  all,  supported  it,  and  it  relieved  an 
intolerable  situation. 

1  Table  Talk  of  Shirley,  p.  180. 


CHAPTER   VIII 

FROUDE  AND  CARLYLE 

WHEN  James  Spedding  introduced  Froude  to 
Carlyle  he  made  unconsciously  an  epoch 
in  English  literature.  For  though  Froude  was 
incapable  of  merging  himself  in  another  man,  as 
Spedding  merged  himself  in  Bacon,  he  did  more 
for  the  author  of  Sartor  Resartm  than  Spedding 
did  for  the  author  of  the  Novum  Organum.  Sped- 
ding's  Bacon  is  an  impossible  hero  of  unhistorical 
perfection.  Froude' s  Carlyle,  like  Boswell's  John- 
son, is  a  great  man  painted  as  he  was.  When 
the  original  head  master  of  Uppingham  described 
his  school  as  Eton  without  its  faults,  there  were 
those  who  felt  for  the  first  time  that  there  was 
something  to  be  said  for  the  faults  of  Eton. 
Carlyle  without  his  paradoxes  and  prejudices, 
his  impetuous  temper  and  his  unbridled  tongue, 
would  be  only  half  himself.  If  he  were  known 
only  through  his  books,  the  world  would  have 
missed  acquaintance  with  letters  of  singular 
beauty,  and  with  the  most  humourous  talker  of 
his  age.  He  was  one  of  two  men,  Newman  being 
the  other,  whose  influence  Froude  felt  through 
life,  and  the  influence  of  Newman  was  chiefly 

288 


FROUDE    AND    CARLYLE  289 

upon  his  style.  Of  Newman  indeed  he  saw  very 
little  after  he  left  Oxford,  though  his  admiration 
and  reverence  for  him  never  abated.  It  was  not 
until  he  came  to  live  in  London  after  the  death 
of  his  first  wife  that  he  grew  really  intimate  with 
Carlyle.  Up  to  that  time  he  was  no  more  than  an 
occasional  visitor  in  Cheyne  Row  with  a  profound 
belief  in  the  philosophy  of  that  incomparable 
poem  in  prose,  The  French  Revolution.  Carlyle 
helped  him  with  his  own  history,  the  earlier 
volumes  of  which  show  clear  traces  of  the  master, 
and  encouraged  him  in  his  literary  work. 

Mrs.  Carlyle  was  scarcely  less  remarkable  than 
her  husband.  Although  she  never  wrote  a  line 
for  publication,  her  private  letters  are  among  the 
best  in  the  language,  and  all  who  knew  her  agree 
that  she  talked  as  well  as  she  wrote.  Froude 
thought  her  the  most  brilliant  and  interesting 
woman  he  had  ever  met.  The  attraction  was 
purely  intellectual.  Mrs.  Carlyle  was  no  longer 
young,  and  Froude' s  temperament  was  not  in- 
flammable. But  she  liked  clever  men,  and  clever 
men  liked  her.  She  was  an  unhappy  woman, 
without  children,  without  religion,  without  any 
regular  occupation  except  keeping  house.  Her 
husband  she  regarded  as  the  greatest  genius  of 
his  time,  and  his  affection  for  her  was  the  deepest 
feeling  of  his  heart.  He  was  at  bottom  a  sincerely 
kind  man,  and  his  servants  were  devoted  to  him. 
But  he  was  troublesome  in  small  matters;  irritable, 
nervous,  and  dyspeptic.  His  books  harassed  him 

(2310)  19 


290  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

like  illnesses,  and  he  groaned  under  the  infliction. 
If  he  were  disturbed  when  he  was  working,  he 
lost  all  self-control,  and  his  wife  felt,  she  said, 
as  if  she  were  keeping  a  private  mad-house.  It 
was  not  quite  so  private  as  it  might  have  been, 
for  Mrs.  Carlyle  found  in  her  grievances  abun- 
dant food  for  her  sarcastic  tongue.  Whatever 
she  talked  about  she  made  interesting,  and  her 
relations  with  her  husband  became  a  common 
subject  of  gossip.  It  was  said  that  the  marriage 
had  never  been  a  real  one,  that  they  were  only 
companions,  and  so  forth.  Froude  was  quite 
content  to  enjoy  the  society  of  the  most  gifted 
couple  in  London  without  troubing  himself  to 
solve  mysteries  which  did  not  concern  him. 

Thrifty  as  she  was,  Mrs.  Carlyle  was  not  fitted 
by  physical  strength  and  early  training  to  be  the 
wife  of  a  poor  man.  She  was  too  anxious  a 
housekeeper,  and  worried  herself  nervously  about 
trifles.  Her  father  had  been  a  country  doctor, 
not  rich,  but  able  to  keep  the  necessary  servants. 
In  Carlyle' s  home  there  were  no  servants  at  all. 
His  father  was  a  mason,  and  the  work  of  the 
house  was  done  by  the  family.  Why  should  his 
wife  be  in  a  different  position  from  his  mother's  ? 
There  was  no  reason,  in  the  nature  of  things.  But 
custom  is  very  strong,  and  the  early  years  of 
Mrs.  Carlyle's  married  life  were  a  hard  struggle 
against  grinding  poverty.  Carlyle  was  grandly 
indifferent  to  material  things.  He  wanted  no 
luxuries,  except  tobacco  and  a  horse.  He  would 
not  have  altered  his  message  to  mankind,  or  his 


FROUDE    AND    CARLYLE  291 

mode  of  delivering  it,  for  the  wealth  of  the  Indies. 
What  he  had  to  say  he  said,  and  men  might  take 
it  or  leave  it  as  they  thought  proper.  He  never 
swerved  from  the  path  of  integrity.  He  did  not 
know  his  way  to  the  house  of  Rimmon.  The 
mere  practical  ability  required  to  produce  such 
a  book  as  Frederick  the  Great  might  have 
realised  a  fortune  in  business.  Carlyle  just  made 
enough  money  to  live  in  decent  and  wholesome 
comfort. 

From  the  first  Carlyle's  conversation  attracted 
Froude,  and  dazzled  him.  But  he  felt,  as  others 
felt,  that  submission  rather  than  intimacy  was 
the  attitude  which  it  suggested  or  compelled. 
There  was  no  republic  of  letters  in  Carlyle's  house. 
It  was  a  dictatorship,  pure  and  simple.  What 
the  dictator  condemned  was  heresy.  What  he 
did  not  know  was  not  knowledge.  Mill  was  a 
poor  feckless  driveller.  Darwin  was  a  pretentious 
sciolist.  Newman  had  the  intellect  of  a  rabbit. 
Herbert  Spencer  was  "  the  most  unending  ass  in 
Christendom."  "  Scribbling  Sands  and  Eliots  " 
were  unfit  to  tie  Mrs.  Carlyle's  shoe-strings. 
Editing  Keats  was  "  currying  dead  dog."  Ruskin 
could  only  point  out  the  correggiosity  of  Correggio. 
Political  economy  was  the  dismal  science,  or 
the  gospel  according  to  McCrowdie.1  Carlyle's 
eloquent  and  humourous  diatribes  were  wonderful, 
laughter-moving,  awe-compelling.  They  did  not 
put  his  hearers  at  their  ease,  and  Froude  felt 
more  admiration  than  sympathy. 

1  McCulloch,  the  editor  of  Adam  Smith,  was  meant. 


292  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

r"In  1861,  when  Froude  had  been  settled  in 
London  about  a  year,  he  received  a  visit  from 
the  great  author  himself.  Carry le  did  not  take  to 
many  people,  but  he  took  to  Froude.  Perhaps 
he  was  touched  by  the  younger  man's  devotion. 
Perhaps  he  saw  that  Froude  was  no  ordinary 
disciple,  and  would  be  able  to  carry  on  the  torch 
when  he  relinquished  it  himself.  At  all  events 
he  expressed  a  wish  to  see  him  oftener  in  his 
walks,  in  his  rides,  in  his  home.  Nothing  could 
be  more  flattering  than  such  an  invitation  from 
such  a  man.  Froude  responded  cordially,  and 
became  an  habitual  visitor.  Like  all  really  good 
talkers,  Carlyle  was  at  his  best  with  a  single 
companion,  and  there  could  be  no  more  sympa- 
thetic companion  than  Froude.  But  there  was 
another  object  of  interest  at  Cheyne  Row,  and 
Froude  felt  for  Mrs.  Carlyle  sincere  compassion. 
She  was  often  left  to  herself  while  her  husband 
wrote  upstairs,  and  she  suffered  tortures  from 
neuralgia.  It  seemed  to  Froude  that  Carlyle, 
who  never  had  a  day's  serious  illness,  felt  more 
for  his  own  dyspepsia  and  hypochondria  than 
for  his  wife's  far  graver  ailments.  In  this  he 
was  very  likely  unjust,  for  Carlyle  was  tenderly 
attached  to  his  "  Jeanie,"  and  would  have  done 
anything  for  her  if  he  had  thought  of  it.  But  he 
was  absorbed  in  Friederich,  whose  battles  he  would 
fight  over  again  with  the  tired  invalid  on  the 
sofa.  If  woman  be  the  name  of  frailty,  the  name 
of  vanity  is  man.  Carlyle  was  fond  of  his  wife, 


FROUDE    AND    CARLYLE  293 

but  he  was  thinking  of  himself.  His  "Niagaras 
of  scorn  and  vituperation  "  were  a  vent  for  his 
own  feelings,  a  sort  of  moral  gout.  The  apostle 
of  silence  recked  not  his  own  rede,  nor  did  he  think 
of  the  impression  which  his  purely  destructive 
preaching  might  make  upon  other  people.  He 
himself  found  in  the  eternities  and  immensities 
some  kind  of  substitute  for  the  Calvinistic  Presby- 
terianism  of  his  childhood.  To  her  it  was  idle 
rhetoric  and  verbiage.  He  had  taken  away  her 
dogmatic  beliefs,  and  had  nothing  to  put  in  their 
place.  Her  "pale,  drawn,  suffering  face"  haunted 
Froude  in  his  dreams.  In  1862  Mrs.  Carlyle's 
health  broke  down,  and  for  a  year  her  case 
seemed  desperate.  Her  doctor  sent  her  away  to 
St.  Leonard's,  and  in  no  long  time  she  apparently 
recovered.  After  that  her  husband  took  more  care 
of  her,  and  provided  her  with  a  carriage.  But 
her  constitution  had  been  shattered,  and  she  died 
suddenly  as  she  drove  through  Hyde  Park  on 
the  2  ist  of  April,  1866,  while  Carry le  was  at 
Dumfries,  resting  after  the  delivery  of  his 
Rectorial  Address  to  the  University  of  Edinburgh. 
Carlyle's  bereavement  drove  him  into  more 
complete  dependence  upon  Froude' s  sympathy 
and  support.  The  lonely  old  man  brooded  over 
his  loss,  and  over  his  own  short-comings.  He  shut 
himself  up  in  the  house  to  read  his  wife's  diaries 
and  papers.  He  found  that  without  meaning  it 
he  had  often  made  her  miserable.  In  her  journal 
for  the  2ist  of  June,  1856,  he  read,  "  The  chief 


294  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

interest  of  to-day  expressed  in  blue  marks  on  my 
wrists  !  "  l  He  realised  that  he  had  almost  driven 
her  to  suicide,  he  the  great  preacher  of  duty  and 
self-abnegation.  "For  the  next  few  years,"  says 
Froude,  "  I  never  walked  with  him  without  his 
recurring  to  a  subject  which  was  never  absent 
from  his  mind."  Doubtless  his  remorse  was 
exaggerated.  His  letters,  and  his  wife's,  show 
that  he  was  a  most  affectionate  husband  when 
nothing  had  occurred  to  deprive  him  of  his  self- 
command.  But  he  had  at  times  been  cruelly 
inconsiderate,  and  he  wished  to  do  penance  for 
his  misdeeds.  A  practical  Christian  would  have 
asked  God  to  pardon  him,  and  made  amends  by 
active  kindness  to  his  surviving  fellow-creatures. 
Carlyle  took  another  course.  In  1871,  five  years 
after  his  wife's  death,  he  suddenly  brought  Froude 
a  large  bundle  of  papers,  containing  a  memoir 
of  Mrs.  Carlyle  by  himself,  a  number  of  her 
letters,  and  some  other  biographical  fragments. 
Froude  was  to  read  them,  to  keep  them,  and 
to  publish  them  or  not,  as  he  pleased,  after 
Carlyle  was  dead.2 

1  This  passage  was  suppressed  by  Froude  when  he  published 
Mrs.  Carlyle's  Diary  and  Letters.  But  he  kept  the  copy  made 
by  Carlyle's  niece  under  his  superintendence,  which  still  exists  ; 
and  as  an  incorrect  version  has  appeared  since  his  death,  I  give 
the  correct  one  now. 

3  "  I  long  much,  with  a  tremulous,  deep,  and  almost  painful 
feeling,  about  that  other  Manuscript  which  you  were  kind  enough 
to  read  at  the  very  first.  Be  prepared  to  tell  me,  with  all  your 
candour,  the  pros  and  contras  there." — Carlyle  to  Froude,  26th 
of  September,  1871.  From  The  Hill,  Dumfries, 


FROUDE    AND    CARLYLE  295 

Well  would  it  have  been  for  Froude's  peace  of 
mind  if  he  had  handed  the  parcel  back  again,  and 
refused  to  look  at  it.  The  tree  of  the  knowledge 
of  good  and  evil  scarcely  yielded  more  fatal  fruit. 
He  read  the  papers,  however,  and  "  for  the  first 
time  realised  what  a  tragedy  the  life  in  Cheyne 
Row  had  been."  That  he  exaggerated  the  purport 
of  what  he  read  is  likely  enough.  When  there  are 
quarrels  between  husband  and  wife,  a  man  natur- 
ally inclines  to  take  the  woman's  side.  Froude, 
as  he  says  himself,  was  haunted  by  Mrs.  Carlyle's 
look  of  suffering,  physical  rather  than  mental,  and 
it  would  necessarily  colour  his  judgment  of  the 
facts.  At  all  events  his  conclusion  was  that 
Carlyle  had  just  ground  for  remorse,  and  that  in 
collecting  the  letters  he  had  partially  expiated 
his  offence.  When  Mrs.  Carlyle's  Correspondence 
came  to  be  published  it  was  seen  that  there  were 
two  sides  to  the  question,  and  that,  if  he  had 
leisure  to  think  of  what  he  was  doing,  Carlyle 
could  be  the  most  considerate  of  husbands.  Irrit- 
able and  selfish  he  might  be.  Deliberately  cruel 
he  never  was.  Froude,  with  his  accustomed 
frankness,  told  Carlyle  at  once  what  he  thought. 
Mrs.  Carlyle's  letters  should  be  published,  not 
alone,  but  with  the  memoir  composed  by  himself. 
Carlyle  had  originally  intended  that  this  memoir, 
or  sketch,  as  it  rather  is,  should  be  preserved, 
but  not  printed.  Afterwards,  however,  he  gave 
it  to  Froude,  and  added  an  express  permission 
to  do  as  he  liked  with  it.  Froude  was  not 


296  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

content  with  his  own  opinion.  He  consulted  John 
Forster,  the  biographer  of  Goldsmith  and  of 
Dickens,  a  common  friend  of  Carlyle  and  himself. 
Forster  read  the  documents,  and  promised  that 
he  would  speak  to  Carlyle  about  them,  giving  no 
opinion  to  Froude,  but  intimating  that  he  should 
impress  upon  Carlyle  the  need  for  making  things 
clear  in  his  will.  This  most  sensible  advice  was 
duly  taken,  and  Carlyle's  will,  signed  on  the  6th 
of  February,  1873,  which  nominated  Forster  and 
his  own  brother  John  as  executors,  contained  the 
following  passage  : 

"  My  manuscript  entitled  '  Letters  and  Memo- 
rials of  Jane  Welsh  Carlyle  '  is  to  me  naturally, 
in  my  now  bereaved  state,  of  endless  value,  though 
of  what  value  to  others  I  cannot  in  the  least 
clearly  judge  ;  and  indeed  for  the  last  four  years 
am  imperatively  forbidden  to  write  farther  on  it, 
or  even  to  look  farther  into  it.  Of  that  manuscript 
my  kind,  considerate,  and  ever  faithful  friend, 
James  Anthony  Froude  (as  he  has  lovingly  pro- 
mised me)  takes  precious  charge  in  my  stead. 
To  him  therefore  I  give  it  with  whatever  other 
fartherances  and  elucidations  may  be  possible,  and 
I  solemnly  request  of  him  to  do  his  best  and  wisest 
in  the  matter,  as  I  feel  assured  he  will.  There 
is  incidentally  a  quantity  of  autobiographic  record 
in  my  notes  to  this  manuscript ;  but  except  as 
subsidiary  and  elucidative  of  the  text  I  put  no 
value  on  such.  Express  biography  of  me  I  had 
really  rather  that  there  should  be  none.  James 


FROUDE    AND    CARLYLE  297 

Anthony  Froude,  John  Forster,  and  my  brother 
John,  will  make  earnest  survey  of  the  manuscript 
and  its  subsidiaries  there  or  elsewhere  in  respect 
to  this  as  well  as  to  its  other  bearings ;  their 
united  utmost  candour  and  impartiality,  taking 
always  James  Anthony  Froude' s  practicality  along 
with  it,  will  evidently  furnish  a  better  judgment 
than  mine  can  be.  The  manuscript  is  by  no  means 
ready  for  publication  ;  nay,  the  questions  how, 
when  (after  what  delay,  seven,  ten  years)  it,  or 
any  portion  of  it,  should  be  published  are  still 
dark  to  me  ;  but  on  all  such  points  James  Anthony 
Froude's  practical  summing  up  and  decision  is  to 
be  taken  as  mine."  No  expression  of  confidence 
could  well  be  stronger,  no  discretion  could  well  be 
more  absolute.  So  far  as  one  man  can  substitute 
another  for  himself,  Carlyle  substituted  Froude. 

Froude  was  under  the  impression  that  Carlyle 
had  given  him  the  letters  because  he  wanted  them 
to  be  published,  and  did  not  want  to  publish 
them.  Embarrassing  as  the  position  was,  he 
accepted  it  in  tranquil  ignorance  of  what  was  to 
come.  Two  years  after  the  receipt  of  the  memoirs 
and  letters  there  arrived  at  his  house  a  box  of 
more  letters,  more  memoirs,  diaries,  odds  and 
ends,  put  together  without  much  arrangement  in 
the  course  of  a  long  life.  He  was  told  that  they 
were  the  materials  for  Carlyle's  biography,  and 
was  begged  to  undertake  it  forthwith.  So  far  as  his 
own  interests  were  concerned,  he  had  much  better 
have  declined  the  task.  His  History  of  England 


298  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

had  given  him  a  name  throughout  Europe,  and 
whatever  he  wrote  was  sure  to  be  well  received. 
His  English  in  Ireland  was  approaching  com- 
pletion, and  he  had  in  his  mind  a  scheme  for 
throwing  fresh  light  on  the  age  of  Charles  V. 
Principal  Robertson's  standard  book  was  in  many 
respects  obsolete.  The  subject  was  singularly 
attractive,  and  would  have  furnished  an  excellent 
opportunity  for  bringing  out  the  best  side  of 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  which  in  Charles's 
son,  Philip,  so  familiar  in  Froude's  History  of 
England,  was  seen  at  its  worst  or  weakest. 
Charles  was  to  him  an  embodiment  of  the 
Conservative  principle,  which  he  regarded  as  the 
strongest  part  of  Catholicism,  and  as  needed  to 
counteract  the  social  upheaval  of  the  Reforma- 
tion. Such  a  book  he  could  write  in  his  own  way, 
independent  of  every  one.  The  biographer  of 
Carlyle,  on  the  other  hand,  would  be  involved  in 
numerous  difficulties,  could  hardly  avoid  giving 
offence,  and  must  sacrifice  years  of  his  life  to  em- 
ployment more  onerous,  as  well  as  less  lucrative, 
than  writing  a  History  of  his  own .  Carlyle,  however, 
was  persistent,  and  Froude  yielded.  After  Mrs. 
Carlyle' s  death  they  had  met  constantly,  and  the 
older  man  relied  upon  the  younger  as  upon  a  son. 
Froude  sat  down  before  the  mass  of  documents 
in  the  spirit  which  had  encountered  the  manu- 
scripts of  Simancas.  No  help  was  accorded  him. 
He  had  to  spell  out  the  narrative  for  himself.  On 
one  point  he  did  venture  to  consult  Carlyle,  but 


FROUDE    AND    CARLYLE  299 

Carlyle  shrank  from  the  topic  with  evident  pain, 
and  the  conversation  was  not  renewed.  It 
appeared  from  Mrs.  Carlyle's  letters  and  journals 
that  she  had  been  jealous  of  Lady  Ashburton, 
formerly  Lady  Harriet  Baring,  and  by  birth  a 
Sandwich  Montagu.  "  Lady  Ashburton,"  says 
Charles  Greville,  writing  on  the  occasion  of  her 
death  in  1857,  "  was  perhaps,  on  the  whole,  the 
most  conspicuous  woman  in  the  society  of  the 
present  day.  She  was  undoubtedly  very  intelli- 
gent, with  much  quickness  and  vivacity  in  con- 
versation, and  by  dint  of  a  good  deal  of  desultory 
reading  and  social  intercourse  with  men  more  or 
less  distinguished,  she  had  improved  her  mind, 
and  made  herself  a  very  agreeable  woman,  and 
had  acquired  no  small  reputation  for  ability  and 
wit.  .  .  .  She  was,  or  affected  to  be,  extremely 
intimate  with  every  man  whose  literary  celebrity 
or  talents  constituted  their  only  attraction,  and, 
while  they  were  gratified  by  the  attentions  of  the 
great  lady,  her  vanity  was  nattered  by  the  homage 
of  such  men,  of  whom  Carlyle  was  the  principal. 
It  is  only  justice  to  her  to  say  that  she  treated 
her  literary  friends  with  constant  kindness  and 
the  most  unselfish  attentions.  They  and  their 
wives  and  children  (when  they  had  any)  were 
received  at  her  house  in  the  country,  and  enter- 
tained there  for  weeks  without  any  airs  of  patron- 
age, and  with  a  spirit  of  genuine  benevolence  as 
well  as  hospitality."  T 

1  The  Greville  Memoirs,  vol.  iii.  pp.  109,  1 10. 


300  LIFE   OF    FROUDE 

But  Lady  Ashburton  and  Mrs.  Carlyle  did  not 
get  on.  As  Carlyle's  wife  the  latter  would  doubt- 
less have  been  welcome  enough  at  the  Grange. 
Being  much  cleverer  than  Lady  Ashburton,  she 
seemed  to  dispute  a  supremacy  which  had  not 
hitherto  been  challenged,  and  the  relations  of  the 
two  women  were  strained.  Carlyle,  on  the  other 
hand,  had  become,  so  Froude  discovered  from  his 
wife's  journal,  romantically,  though  quite  inno- 
cently, attached  to  Lady  Ashburton,  and  this 
was  one  cause  of  dissension  at  Cheyne  Row. 
There  was  nothing  very  dreadful  in  the  disclosure. 
Carlyle  was  a  much  safer  acquaintance  for  the 
other  sex  than  Robert  Burns,  whose  conversation 
carried  the  Duchess  of  Gordon  off  her  feet,  and 
Mrs.  Carlyle's  jealousy  was  not  of  the  ordinary 
kind.  Still,  the  incident  was  not  one  of  those 
which  lighten  a  biographer's  responsibility.  Froude 
has  himself  explained,  in  a  paper  not  intended  for 
publication,  the  light  in  which  it  appeared  to  him. 
"  Intellectual  and  spiritual  affection  being  all 
which  he  had  to  give,  Mrs.  Carlyle  naturally  looked 
on  these  at  least  as  exclusively  her  own.  She  had 
once  been  his  idol,  she  was  now  a  household 
drudge,  and  the  imaginative  homage  which  had 
been  once  hers  was  given  to  another."  Froude' s 
posthumous  championship  of  Mrs.  Carlyle  may 
have  led  him  to  magnify  unduly  the  importance 
of  domestic  disagreements.  But  however  that 
may  be,  the  opinions  which  he  formed,  and  which 
Carlyle  gave  him  the  means  of  forming,  did  not 


FROUDE   AND   CARLYLE  301 

increase  the  attractions  of  the  duty  he  had  under- 
taken to  discharge. 

Froude's  own  admiration  of  Carlyle  was,  it 
must  always  be  remembered,  not  in  the  least 
diminished  by  what  he  read.  He  still  thought 
him  the  greatest  man  of  his  age,  and  believed 
that  his  good  influence  would  expand  with  time. 
That  there  should  be  spots  on  the  sun  did  not 
disturb  him,  especially  as  moral  perfection  was 
the  last  thing  he  had  ever  attributed  to  Carlyle. 
Meanwhile  his  position  was  altered,  and  altered, 
as  it  seems,  without  his  knowledge.  Carlyle' s 
original  executors  were  his  brother,  Dr.  Carlyle, 
and  John  Forster.  Forster  died  in  1876,  and  by 
a  codicil  dated  the  8th  of  November,  1878,  Froude's 
name  was  put  in  the  place  of  his,  Sir  James 
Stephen,  the  eminent  jurist,  afterwards  a  judge  of 
the  High  Court,  being  added  as  a  third.  At  that 
time  Froude  was  engaged,  to  Carlyle's  knowledge, 
upon  the  first  volume  of  the  Life.  At  Carlyle's 
request  he  had  given  up  the  editorship  of  Fraser's 
Magazine,  which  brought  him  in  a  comfortable 
income  of  four  hundred  a  year,  and  he  had  wholly 
devoted  himself  to  the  service  of  his  master. 
Carlyle  expected  that  he  would  soon  follow  his 
wife.  He  survived  her  fifteen  years,  during  which 
he  wrote  little,  for  his  right  hand  was  partly 
paralysed,  and  continually  meditated  upon  the 
future  destiny  of  the  memorials  entrusted  to 
Froude. 

In    1879    Dr.    Carlyle    died,    leaving    Froude 


302  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

and  Stephen  the  sole  executors  under  the  will. 
Late  in  the  autumn  of  that  year  Carlyle  suddenly 
said  to  Froude,  "  When  you  have  done  with 
those  papers  of  mine,  give  them  to  Mary."  Mary 
was  his  niece,  Mary  Aitken,  Mrs.  Alexander 
Carlyle,  who  had  lived  in  Cheyne  Row  to  take 
care  of  her  uncle  since  her  aunt's  death,  and 
was  married  to  her  cousin.  Carlyle  speaks  of 
her  with  great  affection  in  his  will,  "  for  the 
loving  care  and  unwearied  patience  and  help- 
fulness she  has  shown  to  me  in  these  my 
last  solitary  and  infirm  years."  It  was  natural 
that  he  should  think  of  her,  and  should  con- 
template leaving  her  more  than  the  five  hundred 
pounds  specified  in  his  original  will.  But  this 
particular  request  was  so  startling  that  Froude 
ought  to  have  made  further  inquiries.  The 
papers  had  been  given  to  him,  and  he  might 
have  destroyed  them.  They  had  been,  without 
his  knowledge,  left  in  the  will  to  John  Carlyle, 
who  was  then  dead.  Carlyle' s  mind  was  not 
clear  about  the  fate  of  his  manuscripts.  Froude, 
however,  acquiesced,  and  did  not  even  ask  that 
Carlyle  should  put  his  intentions  on  paper.  At 
this  time,  while  he  was  writing  the  first  volume 
of  the  Life,  Froude  made  up  his  mind  to  keep 
back  Mrs.  Carlyle's  letters,  with  her  husband's 
sketch  of  her,  to  suppress  the  fact  that  there 
had  been  any  disagreement  between  them,  but 
to  publish  in  a  single  volume  Carlyle's  remin- 
iscences of  his  father,  of  Edward  Irving,  of  Francis 


FROUDE   AND    CARLYLE  303 

Jeffrey,  and  of  Robert  Southey.  To  this  separate 
publication  Carlyle  at  once  assented.  But  in 
November,  1880,  when  he  was  eighty-five,  and 
Mrs.  Carlyle  had  been  fourteen  years  in  her  grave, 
he  asked  what  Froude  really  meant  to  do  with 
the  letters  and  the  memoir.  Forced  to  make  up 
his  mind  at  once,  and  believing  that  publica- 
tion was  Carlyle' s  own  wish,  he  replied  that  he 
meant  to  publish  them.  The  old  man  seemed 
to  be  satisfied,  and  no  more  was  said.  Froude 
drew  the  inference  that  most  people  would,  in 
the  circumstances,  have  drawn.  He  concluded 
that  Carlyle  wished  to  relieve  himself  of  respon- 
sibility, to  get  the  matter  off  his  mind,  to  have 
no  disclosure  in  his  lifetime,  but  to  die  with  the 
assurance  that  after  his  death  the  whole  story  of 
his  wife's  heroism  would  be  told. 

On  the  4th  of  February,  1881,  Carlyle  died. 
Froude,  Tyndall,  and  Lecky  attended  his  quiet 
funeral  in  the  kirkyard  of  Ecclefechan,  where  he 
lies  with  his  father  and  mother.  Dean  Stanley  had 
offered  Westminster  Abbey,  but  the  family  had 
refused.  Carlyle  was  buried  among  his  own 
people,  who  best  understood  him,  and  whom  he 
best  understood.  The  two  volumes  of  remi- 
niscences at  once  appeared,  including  sketches 
of  Irving  and  Jeffrey,  with  the  memoir  of  Mrs. 
Carlyle.  But  even  before  the  publication  of 
these  volumes,  which  came  out  early  in  March, 
a  question,  which  was  ominous  of  future  trouble, 
arose  out  of  copyright  and  title  to  profits.  A 


304  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

fortnight  after  Carlyle's  death Froude's co-executor, 
Mr.  Justice  Stephen,  had  a  personal  interview 
with  Mrs.  Alexander  Carlyle,  in  the  presence  of 
her  husband,  and  of  Mr.  Ouvry,  who  was  acting 
as  solicitor  for  all  parties.  On  this  occasion 
Mrs.  Carlyle  said  that  Froude  had  promised  her 
the  whole  profits  of  the  Reminiscences,  that  her 
uncle  had  approved  of  this  arrangement,  and 
that  she  would  not  take  less.  Thus  the  first 
difference  between  Froude  and  the  Carlyle  family 
related  to  money.  Mrs.  Carlyle  did  not  know 
that  the  memoirs  of  her  aunt  would  be  among 
the  reminiscences,  and  the  sum  which  Froude 
had  promised  her  was  the  speculative  value  of 
an  American  edition,  which  was  never  in  fact 
realised. 

In  lieu  of  this  he  offered  half  the  English  profits, 
and  brought  out  the  Reminiscences,  "  Jane  Welsh 
Carlyle  "  being  among  them.  They  were  eagerly 
read,  not  merely  by  all  lovers  of  good  literature, 
but  by  all  lovers  of  gossip,  good  or  bad.  Carlyle's 
pen,  like  Dante's,  "bit  into  the  live  man's  flesh  for 
parchment."  He  had  a  Tacitean  power  of  drawing 
a  portrait  with  a  phrase  which  haunted  the 
memory.  James  Carlyle,  the  Annandale  mason, 
was  as  vivid  as  Jonathan  Oldbuck  himself.  But 
it  was  upon  Mrs.  Carlyle  that  public  interest 
fastened.  The  delineation  of  her  was  most  beauti- 
ful, and  most  pathetic.  There  were  few  expres- 
sions of  actual  remorse,  and  Carlyle  was  not  the 
first  man  to  feel  that  the  value  of  a  blessing  is 


FROUDE   AND   CARLYLE  305 

enhanced  by  loss.     But  there  was  an  undertone 
of  something  more  than  regret,  a  suspicion  or 
suggestion  of  penitence,  which  set  people  talking. 
It  is  always  pleasant  to  discover  that  a  preacher 
of  righteousness  has  not  been  a  good  example  him- 
self, and  "poor  Mrs.  Carlyle"  received  much  post- 
humous sympathy,  as  cheap  as  it  was  useless. 
Whether    Froude    should    have    published    the 
memoir  is  a  question  which   may  be  discussed 
till  the  end  of  time.     He  conceived  himself  to  be 
under  a  pledge.     He  had  given  his  word  to  a  dead 
man,  who  could  not  release  him.     It  seems,  how- 
ever, clear  that  he  should  have  taken  the  course 
least  injurious  to  Carlyle' s  memory,  and  in  such  a 
very  delicate  matter  he  might  well  have  asked 
advice.  From  the  purely  literary  point  of  view  there 
could  be  no  doubt  at  all.     Not  even  Frederick  the 
Great,    that    storehouse   of    "  jewels   five    words 
long,"  contains  more  sparkling  gems  than  these 
two  precious  little  volumes.     Froude  speaks  in  his 
preface  of  having  made   "  requisite  omissions." 
A  few  more  omissions  might  have  been  made  with 
advantage,    especially    a   brutal    passage    about 
Charles  Lamb  and  his  sister,  which  Elia's  countless 
admirers  find  it  hard  to  forgive.     Mrs.  Procter, 
widow  of  Barry  Cornwall,  the  poet,  and  herself 
a  most  remarkable  woman,  was  so  much  annoyed 
by   the   description   of   her   mother,   Mrs.    Basil 
Montagu,  and  her  step-father,  the  editor  of  Bacon,1 
that  she  published  some  early  and  rather  obsequious 

^Carlyle's  Miscellanies,  i.  223-230. 
(2310)  2O 


306  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

letters  written  to  them  by  Carlyle  himself.  But 
the  chief  outcry  was  raised  by  the  revelation  of 
Carlyle's  most  intimate  feelings  about  his  wife, 
and  about  his  own  behaviour  to  her.  There  was 
nothing  very  bad.  He  was  driven  to  accuse 
himself  of  the  crime  that,  when  he  was  writing 
Frederick  and  she  lay  ill  on  the  sofa,  he  used  to 
talk  to  her  about  the  battle  of  Mollwitz.  Froude 
was  naturally  astonished  at  the  effect  produced,  but 
then  Froude  knew  Carlyle,  and  the  public  did  not. 

Trouble,  however,  awaited  him  of  a  very 
different  kind.  After  the  publication  of  the 
Reminiscences,  on  the  3rd  of  May,  1881,  he  returned 
to  Mrs.  Alexander  Carlyle  the  manuscript  note- 
book which  contained  the  memoir  of  her  aunt,  as 
Carlyle  had  requested  him  to  do.  At  the  end  of 
it,  on  separate  and  wafered  paper,  following  a 
rather  vague  surmise  that,  though  he  meant  to 
burn  the  book,  it  would  probably  survive  him, 
and  be  read  by  his  friends,  were  these  words  : 

"  In  which  event,  I  solemnly  forbid  them,  each 
and  all,  to  publish  this  Bit  of  Writing  as  it  stands 
here  ;  and  warn  them  that  without  fit  editing  no 
part  of  it  should  be  printed  (nor  so  far  as  I  can 
order,  shall  ever  be) ;  and  that  the  '  fit  editing ' 
of  perhaps  nine-tenths  of  it  will,  after  I  am  gone, 
have  become  impossible. 

"  T.  C.  (Saturday,  July  28th,  1866)." 

Mary  Carlyle  at  once  wrote  to  The  Times,  and 
accused  Froude  of  having  violated  her  uncle's 


FROUDE    AND    CARLYLE  307 

express  directions.  It  would  have  been  better 
if  Froude  had  himself  quoted  this  passage,  and 
explained  the  subsequent  events  which  made  it 
obsolete.  But  he  never  suspected  any  one,  and 
believed  at  the  time  of  publication  in  the  entire 
friendliness  of  the  Carlyle  family.  His  answer  to 
the  charge  of  betraying  a  trust  was  simple  and 
satisfactory.  Carlyle  had  changed  his  mind.  This 
is  clear  from  the  fact  that  he  gave  Froude  the 
memoir  in  1871,  five  years  after  it  was  written,  to 
do  as  he  pleased  with  ;  and  still  clearer  from  the 
conversation  in  1880,  when  Froude  told  him  that 
he  meant  to  publish,  and  Carlyle  said  "  Very  well." 
Moreover,  the  will,  a  formal  and  legal  document, 
expressly  gave  Froude  entire  discretion  in  the 
matter.  Froude  replied  at  first  with  temper  and 
judgment.  But  when  Mrs.  Carlyle  persisted  in 
her  insinuations,  and  implied  a  doubt  of  his 
veracity,  he  gave  way  to  a  very  natural  resentment, 
and  made  a  rash  offer.  He  had,  he  said,  brought 
out  the  memoir  by  Carlyle's  own  desire.  He 
should  do  the  same  with  Mrs.  Carlyle's  letters, 
for  the  same  reason.  "  The  remaining  letters," 
he  went  on  to  say,  "  which  I  was  directed  to  return 
to  Mrs.  Carlyle  so  soon  as  I  had  done  with  them, 
I  will  restore  at  once  to  any  responsible  person 
whom  she  will  empower  to  receive  them  from  me. 
I  have  reason  to  complain  of  the  position  in  which 
I  have  been  placed  with  respect  to  these  MSS. 
They  were  sent  to  me  at  intervals  without  inven- 
tory or  even  a  memorial  list.  I  was  told  that  the 


3o8  'LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

more  I  burnt  of  them  the  better,  and  they  were 
for  several  years  in  my  possession  before  I  was 
aware  that  they  were  not  my  own.  Happily  I 
have  destroyed  none  of  them,  and  Mrs.  Carlyle 
may  have  them  all  when  she  pleases."  Froude 
can  hardly  have  reflected  upon  the  full  significance 
of  what  he  was  saying.  He  had  at  this  time  been 
long  engaged  upon  the  biography  of  Carlyle, 
and  a  considerable  part  of  it  was  finished.  If  he 
had  then  given  back  his  materials,  his  labour 
would  have  been  wasted,  and  Carlyle' s  own 
personal  injunction  would  have  been  disobeyed. 
Carlyle' s  memory  would  also  have  suffered  irre- 
parable injury.  It  is  said,  and  it  squares  with 
the  facts,  that  Mary  Carlyle  and  her  friends,  whose 
literary  judgment  was  not  quite  equal  to  Carlyle' s 
own,  desired  to  substitute  as  his  biographer  some 
learned  professor  in  Scotland.1  If  that  were  their 
object,  they  are  to  be  congratulated  upon  their 
failure.  For  the  offer  was  not  carried  out.  As  a 
bare  promise  without  consideration  it  was  not  of 
course  valid  in  law,  and  since  no  one  had  acted 
upon  it,  its  withdrawal  did  no  one  any  harm. 
There  were  also  legal  difficulties  which  made  its 
fulfilment  impossible.  According  to  counsel's 
opinion,  dated  the  I3th  of  May,  1881,  Carlyle's  re- 
quest that  the  papers  should  be  restored  was  "  an 
attempted  verbal  testamentary  disposition,  which 
had  no  legal  authority."  The  documents  belonged 

1  David  Masson,  the  editor  of  Milton,  I  have  been  told,  but  I 
do  not  know. 


FROUDE    AND    CARLYLE  309 

not  to  Froude  personally,  but  to  himself  and  Fitz- 
james  Stephen,  as  joint  executors,  and  Stephen 
has  left  it  on  record  that  he  would  not  have 
consented  to  their  return  until  Froude' s  task  was 
accomplished. 

Mrs.  Alexander  Carlyle's  view  was  not  shared 
by  other  and  older  members  of  her  uncle's  family. 
During  the  summer  of  1881  Froude  received  from 
Carlyle's  surviving  brother,  James,  and  his  sur- 
viving sister,  Mrs.  Austin,  a  letter  dated  the  8th  of 
August,  and  written  from  Ecclefechan,  in  which  he 
was  implored  not  to  give  up  his  task  of  writing  the 
Life,  and  assured  of  their  perfect  reliance  upon 
him.  This  assurance  is  the  more  significant 
because  it  was  given  after  the  publication  of  the 
Reminiscences.  It  was  renewed  on  James  Carlyle's 
part  through  his  son  after  the  appearance  of  Mrs. 
Carlyle's  letters  in  1883,  and  by  Mrs.  Austin 
through  her  daughter  upon  receiving  the  final 
volumes  of  the  biography  in  1884.  Miss  Austin 
wrote  at  her  mother's  request  on  the  25th  of 
October,  1884,  "  My  uncle  at  all  times  placed 
implicit  confidence  in  you,  and  that  confidence  has 
not,  I  am  sure,  in  any  way  been  abused.  He 
always  spoke  of  you  as  his  best  and  truest  friend." 
Time  has  amply  vindicated  Carlyle's  opinion,  and 
his  discretion  in  the  choice  of  a  biographer. 

As  Mrs.  Alexander  Carlyle  considered  the 
publication  of  the  memoir,  which  is  by  far  the 
most  interesting  part  of  the  Reminiscences,  to 
be  an  impropriety,  and  a  breach  of  faith,  it  might 


310  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

have  been  supposed  that  she  would  repudiate  the 
idea  of  deriving  any  profit  from  the  book.  On 
the  contrary,  she  attempted  to  secure  the  whole, 
and  refused  to  take  a  part,  declaring  that  Froude 
had  promised  to  give  her  all.  Froude's  re- 
collection was  that,  thinking  Carlyle' s  provision 
for  his  niece  insufficient,1  he  had  promised  her  the 
American  income,  which  he  had  been  told  would  be 
large,  though  it  turned  out  to  be  very  small  indeed, 
in  acknowledgment  of  her  services  as  a  copyist. 
Ultimately  he  made  her  the  generous  offer  of  fifteen 
hundred  pounds,  retaining  only  three  hundred 
for  himself.  She  accepted  the  money,  though 
she  denied  that  it  was  a  gift.  In  the  opinion  of 
Mr.  Justice  Stephen,  which  is  worth  rather  more 
than  hers,  it  was  legally  a  gift,  though  there  may 
have  been  in  the  circumstances  a  moral  obligation. 
But  Mary  Carlyle  put  forward  another  claim,  of 
which  the  executors  heard  for  the  first  time  in 
June,  1881.  She  then  said  that  in  1875,  six  years 
before  his  death,  her  uncle  had  orally  given  her 
ah1  his  papers,  and  handed  her  the  keys  of  the 
receptacles  which  contained  them. 

Her  recollection,  however,  must  have  been 
erroneous.  For  the  bulk  of  the  papers  had  been 
in  Froude's  possession  since  the  end  of  1873, 
or  at  latest  the  beginning  of  1874,  and  were 

1  The  provision  for  Mary  Carlyle  in  the  will  of  1873  was, 
however,  materially  increased  by  the  codicil  of  1878,  under 
which  she  received  the  house  in  Cheyne  Row  after  the  death 
of  her  uncle  John,  who  died  before  her  uncle  Thomas. 


FROUDE    AND    CARLYLE  311 

not  in  the  drawers  or  boxes  which  the  keys 
would  have  opened.  On  the  strength  of  her 
own  statement,  which  was  never  tested  in  a 
court  of  law  and  was  inconsistent  with  the 
clause  in  Carlyle's  will  leaving  his  manuscripts 
to  his  brother  John,  Mrs.  Carlyle  demanded 
that  Froude  should  surrender  the  materials  for 
his  biography,  and  not  complete  it.  He  put 
himself  into  the  hands  of  his  co-executor,  who 
successfully  resisted  the  demand,  and  Froude, 
in  accordance  with  Carlyle's  clearly  expressed 
desire,  kept  the  papers  until  he  had  done  with 
them.  In  a  long  and  able  letter  to  Froude 
himself,  printed  for  private  circulation  in  1886, 
Mr.  Justice  Stephen  says,  with  natural  pride, 
"  It  was  my  whole  object  throughout  to  prevent 
a  law-suit  for  the  determination  of  what  I  felt 
was  a  merely  speculative  question,  and  to  defeat 
the  attempt  made  to  prevent  you  from  writing 
Mr.  Carlyle's  life,  and  I  am  happy  to  say  I  suc- 
ceeded." The  public  will  always  be  grateful 
to  the  Judge,  for  there  was  no  one  living  except 
Froude  who  had  both  the  knowledge  and  the 
eloquence  that  could  have  produced  such  a 
book  as  his.  Of  the  Reminiscences  Froude  wrote 
to  Skelton,  "  To  me  in  no  one  of  his  writings 
does  he  appear  in  a  more  beautiful  aspect ;  and 
so,  I  am  still  convinced,  will  all  mankind  even- 
tually think." 

His  own  frame  of  mind  at  this  period  is  vividly 
expressed  in  a  letter  to  Max   Miiller,  dated  the 


312  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

8th  of  December,  1881.  After  some  references  to 
Goethe's  letters,  and  German  copyright,  he  con- 
tinues : 

"  So  much  ill  will  has  been  shown  me  in  the 
case  of  other  letters  that  I  walk  as  if  on  hot  ashes, 
and  often  curse  the  day  when  I  undertook  the  busi- 
ness. I  had  intended,  when  I  finished  my  English 
history,  to  set  myself  quietly  down  to  Charles 
the  Fifth,  and  spend  the  rest  of  my  life  on  him. 
I  might  have  been  half  through  by  this  time, 
and  the  world  all  in  good  humour  with  me.  My 
ill  star  was  uppermost  when  I  laid  this  aside. 
There  are  objections  to  every  course  which  I 
can  follow.  The  arguments  for  and  against  were 
so  many  and  so  strong  that  Carlyle  himself  could 
not  decide  what  was  to  be  done,  and  left  it  to  me. 
He  could  see  all  sides  of  the  question.  Other 
people  will  see  one,  or  one  more  strongly  than 
another,  whatever  it  may  be  ;  and  therefore,  do 
what  I  will,  a  large  body  of  people  will  blame 
me.  Nay,  if  I  threw  it  up,  a  great  many  would 
blame  me.  What  have  I  done  that  I  should 
be  in  such  a  strait  ?  But  I  am  sixty-four  years 
old,  and  I  shall  soon  be  beyond  it  all." 

The  first  two  volumns  of  the  biography,  covering 
the  earlier  half  of  Carlyle' s  life,  when  his  home 
was  in  Scotland,  from  1795  to  1835,  appeared 
in  1882,  and  added  to  the  hubbub.  The  public 
had  got  on  a  false  scent,  and  gossip  had  found 
a  congenial  theme.  Carlyle  was  in  truth  one 
of  the  noblest  men  that  ever  lived.  His  faults 


FROUDE   AND   CARLYLE  313 

were  all  on  the  surface.  His  virtues  were  those 
which  lie  at  the  foundation  of  our  being.  For 
the  common  objects  of  vulgar  ambition  he  had 
a  scorn  too  deep  for  words.  He  never  sought, 
and  he  did  not  greatly  value,  the  praise  of  men. 
He  had  a  message  to  deliver,  in  which  he  pro- 
foundly believed,  and  he  could  no  more  go  beyond 
it,  or  fall  short  of  it,  than  Balaam  when  he  was 
tempted  by  Balak.  Contemporaries  without  a 
hundredth  part  of  his  talent,  even  for  practical 
business,  attained  high  positions,  or  positions 
which  the  world  thought  high.  Carlyle  did  not 
envy  them,  was  not  dazzled  by  them,  but  held 
to  his  own  steadfast  purpose  of  preaching  truth 
and  denouncing  shams.  His  generosity  to  his 
own  family  was  boundless,  and  he  never  ex- 
pected thanks.  He  was  tender-hearted,  forgiving, 
kind,  in  all  great  matters,  whenever  he  had  time 
to  think.  Courage  and  truth  made  him  indifferent 
to  fashion  and  popularity.  Popularity  was  not 
his  aim.  His  aim  was  to  tell  people  what  was 
for  their  good,  whether  they  would  hear  or 
whether  they  would  forbear.  Froude  had  so 
much  confidence  in  the  essential  greatness  of  the 
man  that  he  did  not  hesitate  to  show  him  as  he 
was,  not  a  prodigy  of  impossible  perfection,  but 
a  sterling  character  and  a  lofty  genius.  There- 
fore his  portrait  lives,  and  will  live,  when  bio- 
graphies written  for  flattery  or  for  edification  have 
been  consigned  to  boxes  or  to  lumber-rooms. 
Froude  was  only  following  the  principles  laid 


314  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

down  by  Carlyle  himself.  In  reviewing  Lockhart's 
Life  of  Scott,  Carlyle  emptied  the  vials  of  his  scorn, 
which  were  ample  and  capacious,  upon  "  English 
biography,  bless  its  mealy  mouth."  The  censure 
of  Lockhart  for  "  personalities,  indiscretion,"  vio- 
lating the  "  sanctities  of  private  life,"  was,  he 
said,  better  than  a  good  many  praises.  A  bio- 
grapher should  speak  the  truth,  having  the  fear 
of  God  before  his  eyes,  and  no  other  fear  whatever. 
That  Lockhart  had  done,  and  in  the  eyes  of 
Carlyle,  who  admired  him  as  he  admired  few  men, 
it  was  a  supreme  merit.  For  the  hypothesis  that 
Lockhart  "  at  heart  had  a  dislike  to  Scott,  and 
had  done  his  best  in  an  underhand,  treacherous 
manner  to  dis-hero  him,"  he  expressed,  as  he  well 
might,  unbounded  contempt.  It  seems  incredible 
now  that  such  a  theory  should  ever,  in  or  out 
of  Bedlam,  have  been  held.  Perhaps  it  will  be 
equally  incredible  some  day  that  a  similar  view 
should  have  been  taken  of  the  relations  between 
Froude  and  Carlyle. 

It  is  no  disparagement  of  Lockhart's  great  book 
to  say  that  in  this  respect  of  telling  the  truth 
he  had  an  easy  task.  For  Scott  was  as  nearly 
faultless  as  a  human  creature  can  be.  Every  one 
who  knew  him  loved  him,  and  he  loved  all  men, 
even  Whigs.  His  early  life,  prosperous  and  suc- 
cessful, was  as  different  as  possible  from  Carlyle's. 
It  was  not  until  the  years  were  closing  in  upon 
him  that  misfortune  came,  and  called  out  that 
serene,  heroic  fortitude  which  his  diary  has  made 


FROUDE   AND   CARLYLE  315 

an  everlasting  possession  for  mankind.  Carlyle 
once  said  in  a  splenetic  mood  that  the  lives  of  men 
of  letters  were  the  most  miserable  records  in 
literature,  except  the  Newgate  Calendar.  There 
could  be  no  more  striking  examples  to  the  contrary 
than  Scott's  life  and  his  own.  Perhaps  Froude 
went  too  far  in  the  direction  indicated  by  Carlyle 
himself ;  abounded,  as  the  French  say,  too  much 
in  Carlyle' s  sense.  In  his  zeal  to  paint  his  hero, 
as  his  hero's  hero  wished  to  be  painted,  with  the 
warts,  he  may  have  made  those  disfiguring  marks 
too  prominent.  That  a  great  man  often  has  many 
small  faults  is  a  truism  which  does  not  need 
perpetual  insistence.  Froude  is  rather  too  fond, 
like  Carlyle  himself,  of  taking  up  and  repeating 
a  single  phrase.  When,  for  example,  Carlyle's 
mother  said,  half  in  fun,  that  he  was  "  gey  ill  to 
deal  wi',"  she  was  not  stating  a  general  proposition, 
but  referring  to  a  particular,  and  not  very  impor- 
tant, case  of  diet.  When  Miss  Welsh,  who  was  in 
love  with  Edward  Irving,  told  Carlyle  in  1823 
that  she  could  only  love  him  as  a  brother,  and 
could  not  marry  him,  it  is  a  too  summary  judg- 
ment, and  not  compatible  with  Froude's  own 
language  elsewhere,  to  say  that  had  they  left 
matters  thus  it  would  have  been  better  for  both 
of  them.  If  she  said  at  the  end  of  her  life,  "  I 
married  for  ambition,  Carlyle  has  exceeded  all 
that  my  wildest  hopes  ever  imagined  of  him — and 
I  am  miserable," l  she  said  also,  many  times 

1  Life,  i.  302. 


3i6  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

over,  that  he  was  the  tenderest  of  husbands,  and 
that  no  mother  could  have  watched  her  health 
with  more  solicitude.  He  gave  what  he  had  to 
give.  He  could  not  give  what  he  had  not.  "  Of 
all  the  men  whom  I  have  ever  seen,"  said  Froude, 
"  Carry le  was  the  least  patient  of  the  common 
woes  of  humanity."  The  fact  is  that  his  natural 
eloquence  was  irrepressible.  If  Miss  Edge  worth's 
King  Corny  had  the  gout,  nature  said  "  Howl," 
and  he  howled.  If  Carlyle  had  indigestion,  he 
broke  into  picturesque  rhetoric  about  the  demon- 
hag  which  was  riding  him  no-whither.  A  far  more 
characteristic  passage  than  his  mother's  "  gey  ill 
to  deal  wi' "  is  his  own  simple  confession  to  his 
father,  "  When  I  shout  murder,  I  am  not  always 
being  killed."  l 

That  Froude' s  ideas  of  a  biographer's  duty  were 
the  same  as  his  own  Carlyle  had  good  reason  to 
know.  Froude  had  stated  them  plainly  enough  in 
Fraser's  Magazine,  which  Carlyle  always  saw,  for 
June,  1876.  He  prefaced  an  article  on  the  present 
Sir  George  Trevelyan's  Life  of  Macaulay,  a  daring 
attack  upon  that  historian  for  the  very  faults  that 
were  attributed  to  himself,  with  the  following 
sentences  :  "  Every  man  who  has  played  a  distin- 
guished part  in  life,  and  has  largely  influenced 
either  the  fortunes  or  the  opinions  of  his  con- 
temporaries, becomes  the  property  of  the  public. 
We  desire  to  know,  and  we  have  a  right  to  know, 
the  inner  history  of  the  person  who  has  obtained 

1  Life,  i.  209. 


FROUDE    AND    CARLYLE  317 

our  confidence."  This  doctrine  would  not  have 
been  universally  accepted.  Tennyson,  for  instance, 
would  have  vehemently  denied  it.  But  it  is  at 
least  frankly  expressed,  and  Carlyle  must  have 
known  very  well  what  sort  of  biography  Froude 
would  write. 

If  Froude  dwelt  on  Carlyle's  failings,  it  was 
because  he  knew  that  his  reputation  would  bear 
the  strain.  He  has  been  justified  by  the  result, 
for  Carlyle's  fame  stands  higher  to-day  than  it 
ever  stood  before.  That  man,  be  he  prince  or 
peasant,  is  not  to  be  envied  who  can  read  Froude' s 
account  of  Carlyle's  early  life  without  feeling  the 
better  for  it.  It  is  by  no  means  a  cheerful  story. 
The  first  forty  years  of  Carlyle's  existence,  when 
the  French  Revolution  had  not  been  published, 
were  an  apparently  hopeless  struggle  against 
poverty  and  obscurity.  Sartor  Resartus  was 
scarcely  understood  by  any  one,  and  though  his 
wife  saw  that  it  was  a  work  of  genius,  it  seemed 
to  most  people  unintelligible  mysticism.  With  the 
splendid  exception  of  Goethe,  hardly  any  one  saw 
at  that  time  what  Carlyle  was.  He  was  too 
transcendental  for  The  Edinburgh  Review,  to  which 
he  had  occasionally  contributed,  and  the  payment 
for  Sartor  in  Fraser's  Magazine  was  beggarly.1 
For  some  years  after  his  marriage  in  1826  Carlyle 
was  within  measurable  distance  of  starvation. 
Jeffrey  had  to  explain  to  him,  or  did  explain  to 

1  I  need  hardly  say  that  this  was  long  before  Froude's  connection 
with  :Fraser. 


318  LIFE   OF    FROUDE 

him,  that  he  was  unfit  for  any  public  employment. 
He  could  not  dig.  To  beg  he  was  ashamed. 
When  his  father  died  in  1832  he  refused  to  touch 
a  penny  of  what  the  old  man  left,  lest  there  should 
not  be  enough  for  his  brothers  and  sisters.  His 
personal  dignity  made  it  impossible  for  any 
stranger  to  assist  him,  except  by  giving  him  work. 
He  worked  incessantly,  devouring  books  of  all 
sorts,  especially  French  and  German,  translating 
Wilhelm  Meister  so  superbly  well  as  to  make  it 
almost  an  English  book.  There  was  no  greater 
intellect  then  in  the  British  Islands  than  Carlyle's, 
and  very  few  with  which  it  could  be  compared. 
Yet  it  was  difficult  for  him  to  earn  a  bare  subsis- 
tence for  his  wife  and  himself.  Froude  has  brought 
out  with  wonderful  power  and  beauty  the  character 
which  in  Carlyle  was  above  and  beyond  all  the 
gifts  of  his  mind.  If  he  was  a  severe  critic  of 
others,  he  was  a  still  sterner  judge  of  himself.  It 
would  have  been  easy  for  him  to  make  money 
by  writing  what  people  wanted  to  read.  He  was 
determined  that  if  they  read  anything  of  his,  they 
should  read  what  would  do  them  good.  His 
isolation  was  complete.  His  wife  encouraged  him 
and  believed  in  him.  Nobody  could  help  him. 

Work  without  hope  draws  nectar  in  a  sieve, 
And  hope  without  an  object  cannot  live. 

Carlyle,  unlike  Coleridge,  was  a  real  moralist, 
and  it  was  duty,  not  hope,  that  guided  his  pen. 
Health  he  had,  though  he  never  would  admit  it, 


FROUDE   AND   CARLYLE  319 

and  with  excellent  sense  he  invested  his  first 
savings  in  a  horse.  His  frugal  life  was  at  least 
wholesome,  and  the  one  comfort  with  which  he 
could  not  dispense  was  the  cheap  comfort  of 
tobacco.  Idleness  would  have  been  impossible  to 
him  if  he  had  been  a  millionaire,  and  labour  was 
his  refuge  from  despondency.  Like  most  hu- 
mourists, he  had  low  spirits,  though  his  "  genial 
sympathy  with  the  under  side  of  things,"  to  quote 
his  own  definition  of  the  undefinable,  must  have 
been  some  solace  for  his  woes.  He  could  read  all 
day  without  wearying,  so  that  he  need  never  be 
alone.  As  a  talker  no  one  surpassed  him,  or 
perhaps  equalled  him  at  his  best,  in  London  or 
even  in  Annandale.  What  ought  to  have  struck 
all  readers  of  these  volumes  was  the  courage,  the 
patience,  the  dignity,  the  generosity,  and  the 
genius  of  this  Scottish  peasant.  What  chiefly 
struck  too  many  of  them  was  that  he  did  not  get 
on  with  his  wife. 

Froude's  defence  is  first  Carry le's  precept,  and 
secondly  his  own  conviction  that  the  truth  would 
be  advantageous  rather  than  injurious  to  Carlyle. 
Carlyle's  way  of  writing  about  other  people,  for 
instance  Charles  Lamb,  Saint  Charles,  as  Thack- 
eray called  him,  is  sometimes  unpardonable ; 
and  if  Froude  had  suppressed  those  passages  he 
would  have  done  well.  His  own  personal  conduct 
is  a  lesson  to  us  all,  and  that  lesson  is  in  Froude's 
pages  for  every  one  to  read.  "  What  a  noisy 
inanity  is  this  world,"  wrote  Carlyle  in  his  diary 


320  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

at  the  opening  of  the  year  1835.  Without  the 
few  great  men  who,  like  Carry  le,  can  lift  themselves 
and  others  above  it,  it  would  be  still  noisier,  and 
still  more  inane. 

Next  year  the  gossips  had  a  still  richer  feast. 
In  1883  Froude,  faithful  to  his  trust,  brought  out  in 
three  volumes  Letters  and  Memorials  of  Jane  Welsh 
Carlyle.  The  true  and  permanent  interest  of 
this  book  is  that  it  introduced  the  British  and 
American  public  to  some  of  the  most  brilliantly 
witty  and  amusing  epistles  that  the  English 
language  contains.  Indeed,  there  are  very  few 
letter-writers  in  any  language  who  can  be  com- 
pared with  Mrs.  Carlyle.  Inferior  to  her  husband 
in  humourous  description,  as  in  depth  of  thought, 
she  surpassed  him  in  liveliness  of  wit,  in  pungency 
of  satire,  and  in  terseness  of  expression.  Her 
narrative  is  inimitable,  and  sometimes,  as  in  the 
account  of  her  solitary  visit  to  her  old  home  at 
Haddington  twenty-three  years  after  her  marriage, 
her  dramatic  power  is  overwhelming.  Carlyle 
himself  had  been  familiar  to  the  public  for  half 
a  century  through  his  books.  Until  Mrs.  Carlyle's 
letters  appeared  the  world  knew  nothing  of  her 
at  all,  except  through  her  husband's  sketch. 
Considering  that  good  letter-writers  are  almost 
as  rare  as  good  poets,  and  that  Jane  Carlyle  is 
one  of  the  very  best,  the  general  reader  might 
have  been  simply  grateful,  as  perhaps  he  was. 
But  for  purposes  of  scandal  the  value  of  the 
book  was  the  light  it  threw  upon  the  matrimonial 


FROUDE    AND    CARLYLE  321 

squabbles,  actual  or  imaginary,  of  two  remark- 
able persons.  Mrs.  Carlyle  had  long  been  dead, 
and  her  relations  with  her  husband  were  of  no 
importance  to  any  one.  But  the  trivial  mind 
grasps  at  trivialities,  and  will  not  be  satisfied 
without  them.  Thousands  who  were  quite  in- 
capable of  appreciating  the  letters  as  literature 
could  read  between  the  lines,  and  apply  the 
immortal  principle  that  a  warming-pan  is  a 
cover  for  hidden  fire.  Unfortunately,  Carlyle' s 
heart-broken  ejaculations  over  his  dead  wife's 
words  leant  themselves  to  theories  and  surmises. 
He  thought  that  he  had  not  made  enough  of  her 
when  she  was  alive,  and  apparently  he  wanted 
the  world  to  know  that  he  thought  so.  Yet  the 
bulk  of  the  letters  are  not  those  of  an  unhappy, 
oppressed,  down-trodden  woman,  nor  of  a  woman 
unable  to  take  care  of  herself.  Some  few  are 
intensely  miserable,  almost  like  the  cries  of  a 
wounded  animal,  and  these,  even  in  extracts, 
might  well  have  been  omitted.  Mrs.  Carlyle 
would  not  have  written  them  if  she  had  been 
herself,  and  in  a  collection  of  more  than  three 
hundred  they  would  not  have  been  missed.  Some 
thought  also  that  there  were  too  many  household 
details.1  On  the  whole,  however,  these  letters, 
with  the  others  published  in  the  Life,  are  a  rich 
store-house,  and  they  retain  their  permanent  value, 
untouched  by  ephemeral  rumour. 

1  "  A  good  woman,"  I  remember  Lord  Bowen  saying  of  Mrs. 
Carlyle,  "  with  perhaps  an  excessive  passion  for  insecticide." 
(2310)  21 


322  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

I  doubt  if  he  bathed  before  he  dressed. 

A  brasier  ?    the  pagan,  he  burned  perfumes ! 

You  see,  it  is  proved,  what  the  neighbours  guessed : 

His  wife  and  himself  had  separate  rooms. 

Carlyle  had  been  dead  more  than  twenty 
years  before  the  controversies  about  all  that  was 
unimportant  in  him  flickered  out  and  died  an 
unsavoury  death.  The  vital  fact  about  him  and 
his  wife  is  that  they  contributed,  if  not  equally, 
at  least  in  an  unparalleled  degree,  to  the  common 
stock  of  genius.  But  for  Froude  we  might 
never  have  known  that  Mrs.  Carlyle  had  genius 
at  all.  Through  him  we  have  a  series  of  letters 
not  surpassed  by  Lady  Mary  Wortley's,  or  by 
any  woman's  except  Madame  de  Sevigne's. 

Then  in  1884  Froude  completed  his  task  with 
Carlyle' s  Life  in  London,  a  biographical  masterpiece 
if  ever  there  was  one.  It  is  written  on  the  same 
principle  of  telling  the  truth,  painting  the  warts. 
But  it  brings  out  even  more  clearely  than  its  prede- 
cessor the  essential  qualities  of  Carlyle.  In  one  way 
this  was  easier.  The  period  of  fruitless  struggle  was 
almost  over  when  Carlyle  left  Craigenputtock  in 
1834.  After  the  appearance  of  The  French  Revolu- 
tion in  1838  he  was  famous,  and  every  one  who  read 
anything  read  that  book.  Southey  read  it  six 
times.  Dickens  carried  it  about  with  him,  and 
founded  on  it  his  Tale  of  Two  Cities.  Thackeray 
wrote  an  enthusiastic  review  of  it.  Its  wisdom  and 
eloquence  were  a  treasure  to  Dr.  Arnold,  who  knew, 
if  any  man  did,  what  history  was.  It  was  like 


FROUDE    AND    CARLYLE  323 

no  other  book  that  had  ever  been  written,  and 
critics  were  driven  to  talk  of  Aeschylus  or  Isaiah. 
Such  comparisons  profit  little  or  nothing.  The 
French  Revolution  is  an  original  book  by  a  man 
who  believed  in  God's  judgment  upon  sin.  The 
memoirs  of  Madame  Dubarry  might  have  suggested 
it ;  but  it  came  from  Carlyle's  own  heart  and  soul. 

Professors  may  prove  to  their  own  satisfaction 
that  it  is  not  history  at  all,  and  Carlyle  has 
been  posthumously  convicted  of  miscalculating 
the  distance  from  Paris  to  Varennes.  It  remains 
one  of  the  books  that  cannot  be  forgotten,  that 
fascinate  all  readers,  even  the  professors  them- 
selves. And  yet,  greater  than  the  book  itself  is 
Carlyle's  behaviour  when  the  first  volume  had  been 
lost  by  Mill.  ,  Mill,  himself  in  extreme  misery,  had 
to  come  and  tell  the  author.  He  stayed  a  long 
time,  and  when  he  had  gone  Carlyle  said  to  his 
wife,  "  Well,  Mill,  poor  fellow,  is  terribly  cut  up;  we 
must  endeavour  to  hide  from  him  how  very  serious 
this  business  is  to  us."  Maximus  in  maximis ; 
minimus  in  minimis ;  such  was  Carlyle,  and  as 
such  Froude  exhibits  him,  not  concealing  the  fact 
that  in  small  matters  he  could  be  very  small. 

The  two  personalities  of  Carlyle  and  his  wife 
are  so  fascinating  that  there  may  be  some  excuse 
for  regarding  even  their  quarrels,  which  were 
chiefly  on  her  side,1  with  interest.  But  Frederick 

1  "  Both  he  and  she  were  noble  and  generous,  but  his  was  the 
soft  heart  and  hers  the  stern  one." — Carlyle's  Life  in  London, 
vol.  ii.  p.  171. 


324  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

the  Great  will  survive  these  broils,  and  so  long  as 
Carlyle' s   books  are  read  his   biography  will  be 
read  too,  as  his  best  extraneous  memorial,  just, 
eloquent,  appreciative,  sincere.     Carlyle  was  no 
model    of    austere,    colourless    consistency.     His 
reverent  admiration  of  Peel,  whom  he  knew,  is 
quite  irreconcilable  with  his  savage  contempt  of 
Gladstone,  whom  he  did  not  know.     Peel  was  a 
great   Parliamentary   statesman,   and   Gladstone 
was  his  disciple.     Both  belonged  equally  to  the 
class  which   Carlyle   denounced  as  the   ruin   of 
England,  and  rose  to  supreme  power  through  the 
representative  system  that  he  especially  abhorred. 
On  no  important  point,  while  Peel  was  alive,  did 
they  differ.     "  On   the  whole,"   said  Gladstone, 
"  Peel  was  the  greatest  man  I  ever  knew,"  and  in 
finance  he  was  always  a  Peelite.     That  a  man 
who  was  four  times  Prime  Minister  of  England 
could  have  been  a  canting  hypocrite,  deceiving 
himself  and  others,  implies  that  the  whole  nation 
was   fit   for   a   lunatic   asylum.     Carlyle   seldom 
studied  a  political  question  thoroughly,  and  of 
public  men  with  whom  he  was  acquainted  only 
through  the  newspapers  he  was  no  judge.    Personal 
contact  produced  estimates  which,  though  they 
might  be  harsh,  hasty,  and  unfair,  were  always 
interesting,  and  sometimes  marvellously  accurate. 
Of  Peel,  for  instance,  though  he  saw  him  very 
seldom,  he  has  left  a  finished  portrait,  not  omitting 
the  great   Minister's   humour,   for  any   trace  of 
which  the  Peel  papers  may  be  searched  in  vain. 


FROUDE    AND    CARLYLE  325 

The  same  can  be  said  of   Thirlwall,  barring  the 
groundless  insinuation  that   he  was  dishonest  in 
accepting  a  bishopric.     A   very  different  sort  of 
bishop,  Samuel  Wilberforce,  Carlyle  liked  for  his 
cleverness,   though  here  too  he  could  not  help 
suggesting    that    on    the    foundation,    or    rather 
baselessness,   of  the   Christian  religion,   "  Sam " 
agreed  with  him.     The  great  historian  of  the  age 
he  did  not  appreciate  at  all.     But,  then,  he  never 
met  Macaulay.     "  Some  little  ape  called  Keble," 
is  not  a  happy  formula  for  the  author  of  the 
Christian   Year,  and  this  is  one  of  the  phrases 
which  I  think  Froude  might  well  have  omitted, 
as    meaning  no  more  than  a  casual  execration. 
Yet  how  minute  are  these  defects,  when  set  beside 
the  intrinsic  grandeur  of  the  central  figure  in  the 
book.     Carlyle  mixed  with  all  sorts  and  conditions 
of  men  and  women,  from  the  peasants  of  Annandale 
to  the  best  intellectual  society  of  London.     He 
was  always,  or  almost  always,  the  first  man  in 
the  company,  not  elated,  nor  over-awed,  "  standing 
on  the  adamantine  basis  of  his  manhood,  casting 
aside  all  props  and  shears."     From  snobbishness, 
the   corroding  vice   of   English  society,  he  was, 
though  he  once  jocularly  charged  himself  with  it, 
entirely  free.      He   judged   individuals   on  their 
merits  with  an  eye  as  piercing  and  as  pitiless  as 
Saint  Simon's.     On  pretence  and  affectation  he 
had   no    mercy.     Learning,    intellect,    character, 
humility,  integrity,  worth,  he  held  always  in  true 
esteem.     As  Froude  says,  and  it  is  the  final  word, 


326  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

Carlyle's  "  extraordinary  talents  were  devoted, 
with  an  equally  extraordinary  purity  of  purpose, 
to  his  Maker's  service,  so  far  as  he  could  see  and 
understand  that  Maker's  will."  He  led  "a  life 
of  single-minded  effort  to  do  right  and  only  that ; 
of  constant  truthfulness  in  word  and  deed." 

That  the  man  who  wrote  these  sentences  at 
the  close  of  a  book  with  which  they  are  quite  in 
keeping  should  have  been  reviled  as  a  traitor  to 
Carlyle's  memory  is  strange  indeed.  To  Froude 
it  was  incredible.  Conscious  of  regarding  Carlyle 
as  the  greatest  moral  and  intellectual  force  of  his 
time,  he  could  not  have  been  more  astonished 
if  he  had  been  charged  with  picking  a  pocket. 
For  criticism  of  his  own  judgment  he  was  pre- 
pared. He  knew  well  that  acute  differences  of 
opinion  might  arise.  The  dishonesty  and  malig- 
nity imputed  to  him  were  outside  the  habits  of 
his  life  and  the  range  of  his  ideas.  He  lived  in 
a  society  where  such  things  were  not  done,  and 
where  nobody  was  suspected  of  doing  them.  He 
had  fulfilled,  to  the  best  of  his  ability,  Carlyle's 
own  injunctions,  and  he  had  faithfully  portrayed 
as  he  knew  him  the  man  whom  of  all  others  he 
most  revered.  He  was  bewildered,  almost  dazed, 
at  what  seemed  to  him  the  perverse  and  unscrupu- 
lous recklessness  of  his  accusers.  Anonymous  and 
abusive  letters  reached  him  daily ;  some  even  of 
his  own  friends  looked  coldly  on  him.  He  was  a 
sensitive  man,  and  he  felt  it  deeply.  He  shrank 
from  going  out  unless  he  knew  exactly  whom  he 


FROUDE    AND    CARLYLE  327 

was  to  meet.     But  his  pride  came  to  his  rescue, 
and  he  preferred  suffering  injustice  in  silence  to 
discussing  in  public,   as  though  it  admitted  of 
doubt,  the  question  whether  he  was  an  honest 
man.     He  did,  however,  invite  the  opinion  of  his 
co-executor,  an  English  judge,  a  close  friend  of 
Carlyle,  and  a  man  whose  personal  integrity  was 
above    all    suspicion.     Although    the    calumnies 
which  gave  Froude  so  much  distress  have  long 
sunk  into  an  oblivion  of  contempt,  and  require  no 
formal  refutation,  the  conclusive  verdict  of   Sir 
James  Fitzjames  Stephen  may  be  fitly  quoted  here : 
"  For  about  fifteen  years  I  was  the  intimate 
friend  and  constant  companion  of  both  of  you 
[Carlyle  and  Froude],  and  never  in  my  life  did  I 
see  any  one  man  so  much  devoted  to  any  other  as 
you  were  to  him  during  the  whole  of  that  period 
of  time.     The  most  affectionate  son  could  not  have 
acted  better  to  the  most  venerated  father.     You 
cared  for  him,  soothed  him,  protected  him,  as  a 
guide  might  protect  a  weak  old  man  down  a  steep 
and    painful    path.     The    admiration    you    have 
habitually    expressed    for    him    was    unqualified. 
You  never  said  to  me  one  ill-natured  word  about 
him  down  to  this  day.     It  is  to  me  wholly  in- 
credible that  anything  but  a  severe  regard  for 
truth,  learnt  to  a  great  extent  from  his  teaching, 
could  ever  have  led  you  to  embody  in  your  por- 
trait of  him  a  delineation  of  the  faults  and  weak- 
nesses which  mixed  with  his  great  qualities." 

1  My  Relations  with  Carlyle,  p.  6j. 


328  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

Calling  witnesses  to  the  character  of  such  a  man 
as  Froude  is  itself  almost  an  insult.  But  there  is 
one  judgment  so  valuable  and  so  emphatic  that 
I  cannot  refrain  from  citing  it.  The  fifteenth  Earl 
of  Derby  held  such  a  high  position  in  the  political 
world  that  his  literary  attainments  have  been 
comparatively  neglected.  He  was  in  truth  an 
omnivorous  reader  and  a  cool,  sagacious  critic,  who 
was  not  led  astray  by  enthusiasm,  and  never  said 
more  than  he  felt.  Writing  to  Froude  on  the 
20th  of  October,  1884,  Lord  Derby  described 
the  Life  of  Carlyle  as  the  most  interesting  bio- 
graphy in  the  English  language,  and  added,  "  I 
think  you  have  finally  silenced  the  foolish  talk 
about  indiscretion,  and  treachery  to  a  friend's 
memory.  It  is  clear  that  you  have  done  only, 
and  exactly,  what  Carlyle  wished  done :  and 
to  me  it  is  also  apparent  that  he  and  you  were 
right :  that  his  character  could  not  have  been 
understood  without  a  full  disclosure  of  what  was 
least  attractive  in  it :  and  that  those  defects— 
the  product  mainly  of  morbid  physical  con- 
ditions— do  not  really  take  away  from  his  great- 
ness, while  they  explain  much  that  was  dark, 
at  least  to  me,  in  his  writings."  Lord  Derby's 
opinions  were  not  lightly  formed,  and  he  was  as 
much  guided  by  pure  reason  as  mortal  man 
can  be. 

Froude's  own  judgment  is  given  in  a  letter  to 
Lady  Derby,  which  contains  also  much  interesting 
speculation  on  South  African  politics.  Lord 


FROUDE    AND    CARLYLE  329 

Derby,  it  will  be  remembered,  was  at  that  time 
Secretary  of  State  for  the  Colonies. 

"  October  i^th,  1884. — Carlyle  in  London  comes 
out  this  week.  I  loved  and  honoured  him  above 
all  living  men,  and  with  this  feeling  I  have 
done  my  best  to  produce  a  faithful  likeness  of 
him.  This  is  a  consolation  to  me,  if  the  only 
one  I  am  likely  to  have.  We  shall  see.  I  am 
very  anxious  about  South  Africa.  I  have 
written  twice  at  length  to  Lord  Derby.  Un- 
fortunately my  view  is  the  exact  opposite  to 
that  which  is  generally  taken.  Lord  D.  is  evi- 
dently being  driven  into  active  measures  against 
his  will.  My  fear  is  that  there  will  be  some  half- 
action  insufficient  to  crush  the  Dutch,  and  sufficient 
to  exasperate  them.  He  relies  on  the  promised 
support  of  the  Colonial  Ministry.  They  may 
promise,  but  I  will  believe  only  when  I  see  it 
that  a  Cape  Ministry  and  Legislature  will  oppose 
the  Boers  in  earnest.  They  will  encourage  us  to 
entangle  ourselves,  as  they  did  with  the  Diamond 
Fields,  and  then  leave  us  to  get  out  of  the  mess 
as  we  can.  South  Africa  cannot  be  self -governed 
in  connection  with  this  country,  except  with  the 
good- will  of  the  Dutch  population.  Enough  may 
have  been  done,  however,  to  quiet  Parliament 
(which  knows  nothing  about  the  matter)  in  the 
approaching  Session — and  that,  I  suppose,  is  the 
chief  consideration.  Carnarvon  writes  to  me  pre- 
liminary, I  suppose,  to  some  attack  when  Govern- 
ment meets.  I  have  told  him  exactly  whatAI  have 


330  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

told  Lord  D.  I  hope  I  may  turn  out  mistaken, 
but  the  course  of  things  so  far  has  generally  con- 
firmed my  opinion  whenever  I  have  seen  my  way 
to  forming  one.  I  shall  be  glad  to  hear  what  you 
think  about  the  book.  From  you  I  shall  get  the 
friendliest  judgment  that  the  circumstances  admit 
of,  and  if  you  are  dissatisfied  I  shall  know  what 
to  look  for  from  others.  The  last  two  hundred 
pages  are  the  most  interesting.  The  drift  of  the 
whole  is  that  Carlyle  was  by  far  the  most  remark- 
able man  of  his  time — that  five  hundred  years 
hence  he  will  be  the  only  one  of  us  all  whose  name 
will  be  so  much  as  remembered,  while  perhaps  he 
may  be  one  who  will  have  reshaped  in  a  permanent 
form  the  religious  belief  of  mankind.  Therefore  he 
ought  to  be  known  exactly  as  he  was.  The  argu- 
ment will  not  be  felt  by  those  who  disbelieve  in 
his  greatness,  and  the  idolaters — those  who  pretend 
to  worship  without  believing — will  be  savagest  of 
all.  Idols  must  be  draped  in  fine  clothes,  and  are 
reduced  to  nothing  by  mere  human  garments." 

Perhaps  the  fullest,  and  certainly  the  least 
reserved,  account  of  Froude's  own  feelings  about 
the  book  is  contained  in  a  letter  to  Mrs.  Charles 
Kingsley  : 

"  I  tell  Longmans  to-day  to  send  you  the 
book.  If  you  can  find  time,  I  shall  like  to  hear 
the  independent  impression  it  makes  upon  you. 
Only  remember  this  :  that  it  was  Carlyle' s  own 
determination  (or  at  least  desire)  to  do  justice  to 
his  wife,  and  to  do  public  penance  himself — a 


FROUDE    AND    CARLYLE  331 

desire  which  I  think  so  noble  as  to  obliterate 
in  my  own  mind  the  occasion  there  was  for  it. 
I  have  long  known  the  worst,  and  Charles  knew 
it  generally.  We  all  knew  it,  and  yet  the  more 
intimately  I  knew  Carlyle,  the  more  I  loved 
and  admired  him ;  and  some  people,  Lord  Derby, 
for  instance,  after  reading  the  Life,  can  tell  me 
that  their  opinion  of  him  is  rather  raised  than 
diminished.  There  is  something  demonic  both  in 
him  and  her  which  will  never  be  adequately 
understood ;  but  the  hearts  of  both  of  them 
were  sound  and  true  to  the  last  fibre.  You  may 
guess  what  difficulty  mine  has  been,  and  how 
weary  the  responsibility.  You  may  guess,  too, 
how  dreary  it  is  to  me  to  hear  myself  praised 
for  frankness,  when  I  find  the  world  all  fasten- 
ing on  C.'s  faults,  while  the  splendid  qualities 
are  ignored  or  forgotten.  Let  them  look  into 
their  own  miserable  souls,  and  ask  themselves 
how  they  could  bear  to  have  their  own  private 
histories  ransacked  and  laid  bare.  I  deliberately 
say  (and  I  have  said  it  in  the  book),  that  C.'s 
was  the  finest  nature  I  have  ever  known.  It 
is  a  Rembrandt  picture,  but  what  a  picture ! 
Ruskin,  too,  understands  him,  and  feels  too,  as 
he  should,  for  me,  if  that  mattered,  which  it 
doesn't  in  the  least." 

A  few  years  after  publication  the  Reminiscences 
ran  out  of  print,  and  Froude  was  anxious  to 
bring  out  a  corrected  edition.  Mrs.  Alexander 
Carlyle,  however,  wished  for  another  editor.  The 


332  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

copyright  was  Froude' s,  and  no  one  could  reprint 
the  book  in  Great  Britain  without  his  consent. 
At  that  time  there  was  no  international  copyright 
between  the  United  Kingdom  and  the  United 
States.  A  distinguished  American  professor, 
Mr.  Eliot  Norton,  was  invited  by  Mary  Carlyle 
to  re-edit  the  book  beyond  the  Atlantic,  and  he 
undertook  the  task.  Froude  always  thought 
that  Professor  Norton  should  have  communicated 
with  him,  and  the  public  will  probably  be 
of  the  same  opinion.  In  the  end,  however, 
Froude  voluntarily  assigned  the  copyright  to 
Mrs.  Carlyle,  who  then  had  possession  of  the 
papers,  and  Mr.  Norton's  edition  appeared  in 
England,  published  by  Macmillan,  six  years  after 
Carlyle's  death.  It  proved  to  be  very  like  the 
first,  though  some  errors  of  the  press  were  corrected 
and  also  some  slips  of  the  pen.  The  disputed 
memoir  was  not  omitted,  nor  was  anything  of  the 
slightest  interest  added  by  Mr.  Norton  to  the  book. 
In  his  Preface  he  attacked  Froude  for  fulfilling 
Carlyle's  own  wishes,  of  which  he  seems  to  have 
known  little  or  nothing,  and,  by  way  of  further 
justification  for  his  interference,  he  added  the 
following  paragraph  : 

"  The  first  edition  of  the  Reminiscences  was  so 
carelessly  printed  as  to  do  grave  wrong  to  the 
sense.  The  punctuation,  the  use  of  capitals  and 
italics,  in  the  manuscript,  characteristic  of  Carlyle's 
method  of  expression  in  print,  were  entirely  dis- 
regarded. In  the  first  five  pages  of  the  printed 


FROUDE    AND    CARLYLE  333 

text  there  were  more  than  a  hundred  and  thirty 
corrections  to  be  made  of  words,  punctuation, 
capitals,  quotation  marks,  and  such  like ;  and 
these  pages  are  not  exceptional." 

This  looks  like  a  formidable  indictment,  and  in 
the  literal  sense  of  the  words  it  may  be  true.  I 
have  compared  the  first  five  pages  of  the  two 
editions,  and  there  are  a  good  many  changes 
in  the  use  of  capitals  and  italics.  But  except 
one  obvious  misprint  of  a  single  letter,  "  even  " 
for  "  ever,"  there  is  nothing  which  does  "  grave 
wrong "  to  the  sense,  or  affects  it  in  any 
way.  "  And  these  pages,"  as  Mr.  Norton  says, 
with  another  meaning,  "  are  not  exceptional." 
The  later  reminiscences  were  not  easy  to  decipher. 
Carlyle's  handwriting  was  seriously  affected  by 
age,  he  wrote  upon  both  sides  of  very  thin  paper, 
and  I  have  seen  several  letters  of  his  which  bear 
out  Froude's  assertion  that,  after  his  hand  began 
to  shake,  "  it  became  harder  to  decipher  than  the 
worst  manuscript  which  I  have  ever  examined." 
In  preparing  the  book  Froude  had  to  use  a  magni- 
fying glass,  and  in  many  cases  the  true  reading 
was  a  matter  of  opinion.  In  one  case,  however, 
it  was  not.  Sir  Henry  Taylor,  the  most  serene 
and  dignified  of  men,  found  himself  charged  in 
Carlyle's  sketch  of  Southey  with  the  unpleasant 
attribute  of  "  morbid  vivacity,"  and  not  only 
with  morbid  vivacity  simpliciter,  or  per  se,  but 
"  in  all  senses  of  that  deep-reaching  word."  Mr. 
Norton  restored  the  true  reading,  which  was 


334  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

"  marked  veracity,"  though,  on  the  other  hand,  he 
replaced  the  statement,  omitted  by  Froude,  that 
Taylor,  who  had  died  between  the  two  editions, 
was  "  not  a  well-read  or  wide-minded  man."  It 
must  be  admitted  that  in  this  instance  Froude 
allowed  a  proof  which  made  nonsense  to  pass, 
and  that  Mr.  Norton  did  a  public  service  by 
correcting  the  phrase.  Froude' s  occasional  care- 
lessness in  revision  is  a  common  failing  enough. 
What  made  it  remarkable  in  him  was  the  com- 
bination of  liability  to  these  lapses  with  intensely 
laborious  and  methodical  habits. 

Although  Froude's  legal  connection  withCarlyle's 
family  ceased  with  the  assignment  to  Carlyle's 
niece  of  the  copyright  in  the  Reminiscences,  the 
names  of  the  two  men  are  as  inseparably  associated 
as  BoswelTs  and  Johnson's,  Lockhart's  and  Scott's, 
Macaulay's  and  Trevelyan's,  Morley's  and  Glad- 
stone's. Some  readers,  such  as  Tennyson  and 
Lecky,  thought  that  Froude  had  revealed  too 
much.  Others,  such  as  John  Skelton  and  Edward 
FitzGerald,  believed  that  he  had  raised  Carlyle 
to  a  higher  eminence  than  he  had  occupied  before. 
Froude  himself  felt  entire  confidence  both  in  the 
greatness  of  Carlyle's  qualities  and  in  the  perma- 
nence of  his  fame.  That  was  why  he  thought 
that  the  revelation  of  small  defects  would  do 
more  good  than  harm.  A  faultless  character, 
even  if  he  himself  could  have  reconciled  it  with 
his  conscience  to  draw  one,  would  not  have  been 
accepted  as  genuine,  would  not  have  been  treated 


FROUDE    AND    CARLYLE  335 

as  credible.  The  true  character,  in  its  strength 
and  its  weakness,  would  command  belief,  and 
admiration  too.  If  Froude  were  alive,  he  would 
say  that  the  time  had  not  yet  come  for  a  final 
judgment,  and  might  not  come  for  a  hundred 
years.  Still,  I  think  it  will  be  conceded  that  the 
twenty  years  which  have  elapsed  since  he  accom- 
plished his  task  are  a  period  of  growth  rather  than 
decadence  in  the  number  and  zeal  of  Carlyle's 
admirers.  This  is  no  doubt  in  large  measure  due 
to  Carlyle's  own  books.  He  has  been  called  the 
father  of  modern  socialism,  and  credited  with 
the  destruction  of  political  economy.  I  am  too 
much  out  of  sympathy  with  these  views  to  judge 
them  fairly.  But  I  suppose  it  cannot  be  denied 
that  Carlyle  fascinates  thousands  who  do  not 
accept  him  as  an  infallible,  or  even  as  a  fallible, 
guide,  or  that  they,  as  well  as  his  disciples,  devour 
the  pages  of  Froude. 

Nothing  annoyed  Carlyle  more  than  to  be 
told  that  he  confounded  might  with  right.  He 
declared  that,  on  the  contrary,  he  had  never 
said,  and  would  never  say,  a  word  for  power 
which  was  not  founded  on  justice.  Cromwell 
was  as  good  as  he  was  great,  and  he  had  never 
glorified  Frederick,  unless  to  write  a  book  about 
a  man  is  necessarily  to  glorify  him.  This  prevalent 
misconception  of  Carlyle's  gospel,  so  prevalent 
that  it  deceived  no  less  keen  a  critic  than  Lecky, 
was  completely  dissipated  by  Froude.  No  one 
can  read  his  Life  intelligently  without  perceiving 


336  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

that  Carlyle's  real  foe  was  materialism.  The 
French  Revolution  was  to  him  the  central  fact 
of  modern  history,  and  at  the  same  time  a  supreme 
judgment  of  Heaven  upon  a  society  given  up 
to  unrestrained  licentiousness.  Whether  he  was 
right  or  wrong  is  not  the  point.  He  was  as  far 
as  possible  from  being,  in  the  modern  sense, 
a  scientific  historian.  Yet  in  some  respects  he 
was  utilitarian  enough.  The  condition  of  England 
was  to  him  more  important  than  any  constitu- 
tional change,  any  triumph  in  diplomacy,  or 
any  victory  in  war,  and  this  fact  explains  his 
apparently  inconsistent  admiration  of  Peel,  who, 
though  a  Parliamentary  statesman,  had  accom- 
plished a  solid  achievement  for  the  benefit  of  the 
people.  Carlyle  in  his  own  writings  is  an  almost 
insoluble  enigma.  To  have  given  the  true  solution 
is  the  supreme  merit  of  Froude.1 

1  John  Nichol,  a  name  still  dear  in  Scotland,  formerly  Professor 
of  Literature  at  the  University  of  Glasgow,  who  wrote  on  Carlyle 
for  Mr.  Morley's  English  Men  of  Letters  in  1892,  says  in  his  preface  : 
"  Every  critic  of  Carlyle  must  admit  as  constant  obligation  to 
Mr.  Froude  as  every  critic  of  Byron  to  Moore,  or  of  Scott  to 
Lockhart.  ...  I  must  here  be  allowed  to  express  a  feeling  akin 
to  indignation  at  the  persistent,  often  virulent,  attacks  directed 
against  a  loyal  friend,  betrayed,  it  may  be,  by  excess  of  faith, 
and  the  defective  reticence  that  often  belongs  to  genius,  to 
publish  too  much  about  his  hero.  But  Mr.  Froude's  quotation 
in  defence,  from  the  essay  on  Sir  Walter  Scott,  requires  no  supple- 
ment :  it  should  be  remembered  that  he  acted  with  the  most 
ample  authority  ;  that  the  restrictions  under  which  he  was  first 
entrusted  with  the  MSS,  of  the  Reminiscences  and  the  Letters  and 
Memorials  (annotated  by  Carlyle  himself  as  if  for  publication) 
were  withdrawn  ;  and  that  the  initial  permission  to  select  finally 
approached  a  practical  injunction  to  communicate  the  whole." 


•  CHAPTER  IX 

BOOKS   AND   TRAVEL 

THE  two  passions  of  Froude's  life  were  Devon- 
shire and  the  sea.  "  Summer  has  come 
at  last/'  he  wrote  to  Mrs.  Kingsley  from  Salcombe 
in  the  middle  of  September,  "  after  two  months 
of  rain  and  storm.  The  fields  from  which  the 
wrecks  of  the  harvest  were  scraped  up  ruined 
and  sprouting  now  lie  basking  in  stillest  sunshine, 
as  if  wind  and  rain  had  never  been  heard  of.  The 
coast  is  extremely  beautiful,  and  I,  in  addition 
to  the  charms  of  the  place,  hear  my  native  tongue 
spoken  and  sung  in  the  churches  in  undiminished 
purity."  Carlyle  often  kept  him  in  London  when 
he  would  much  rather  have  been  elsewhere. 
But,  wherever  he  was,  he  had  a  ready  pen,  and 
his  thoughts  naturally  clothed  themselves  in  a 
literary  garb.  His  enjoyment  of  books,  especially 
old  books,  was  intense.  Reading,  however,  is  idle 
work,  and  idleness  was  impossible  to  Froude.  On 
his  return  from  South  Africa,  where  everything 
was  being  done  which  he  thought  least  wise,  he 
took  up  a  classical  subject,  and  began  to  write 
a  book  about  Caesar.  He  read  Cicero,  Plutarch, 
Suetonius,  Caesar  himself,  and  produced  early  in 

(2310)  337  22 


338  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

1879  a  volume  which  was  always  a  particular 
favourite  of  his  own.  "  I  believe,"  he  said  to 
Skelton,  "  it  is  the  best  book  I  have  ever  written." 
The  public  did  not  altogether  agree  with  him, 
and  it  never  became  so  popular  as  Short  Studies. 
Yet  it  is  undoubtedly  a  brilliant  performance, 
with  just  the  qualities  which  might  have  been 
expected  to  make  it  popular,  and  a  second  edition 
was  soon  required.  It  is  interesting  from  the 
first  page  to  the  last,  and  its  whole  object  is  to 
show  that  the  Roman  world  in  the  last  days  of 
the  Republic  was  very  like  the  English  world 
under  Queen  Victoria.  In  Rome  itself  it  has 
a  steady  sale.  The  general  reader,  however, 
was  not  wrong  in  thinking  that  these  eloquent 
pages  are  below  the  level  of  Froude  at  his  best. 
There  is  a  hard  metallic  glitter  in  the  style,  and 
a  forced  comparison  of  ancient  with  modern 
things  not  really  parallel,  which  make  the  whole 
narrative  artificial  and  unreal.  Lord  Dufferin 
said,  with  his  natural  acuteness,  "  It  is  interesting, 
and  forcibly  written,  but.  one  feels  he  is  not  a  safe 
guide.  As  they  say  of  the  mansions  of  Ireland, 
'  they  are  always  within  a  hundred  yards  of  the 
best  situation/  so  one  feels  that  Froude  is  never 
quite  in  the  bull's-eye  in  the  view  he  gives."1 

Those  who  criticised  the  book  as  if  it  were  a 
formal  and  historical  narrative  showed  a  lack  of 
humour,  which  is  a  sense  of  proportion.  Macaulay 
might  almost  as  well  be  judged  by  his  Fragment  of 

1  Lyall's  Life  of  Dufferin,  vol.  ii.  p.  244. 


BOOKS   AND    TRAVEL  339 

a  Roman  Tale.  Froude  himself  calls  his  Ccesar  a 
sketch,  and  it  is  scarcely  more  authoritative  than 
the  pamphlet  of  Louis  Napoleon  on  the  same 
subject.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  quite  untrue 
that  Froude  had  not  read  Cicero's  letters.  He 
had  read  those  which  bore  upon  his  subject,  and 
he  quotes  them  freely  enough.  The  fault  of  his 
Ccesar  is  that  he  makes  a  wrong  start.  Points  of 
resemblance  between  the  first  century  before  the 
Christian  era  and  the  nineteenth  century  after  it 
may  of  course  be  found.  But  the  differences  are 
essential  and  fundamental.  A  society  which  rests 
upon  servitude  cannot  be  like  a  society  which 
rests  upon  freedom.  Christianity  has  modified 
the  whole  lives  of  those  who  do  not  profess  it, 
and  has  created  a  totally  new  atmosphere,  even 
if  it  be  not  in  all  respects  a  better  one.  Repre- 
sentative government,  whether  it  be  a  good  thing 
or  a  bad  thing,  is  at  least  a  thing  which  counts. 
Caesar  could  hardly  have  understood  the  idea  of 
an  indissoluble  marriage,  of  a  limited  monarchy, 
of  equality  before  the  law. 

One  strange  similitude  Froude  did,  in  deference 
to  outraged  susceptibilities,  omit,  and  only  the 
first  edition  contains  a  formal  comparison  of 
Julius  Caesar  with  Jesus  Christ.  No  irreverence 
was  intended.  It  was  Froude's  enthusiasm  for 
Caesar  that  carried  him  away.  Still,  the  instance 
is  only  an  extreme  form  of  what  comes  from  push- 
ing parallels  below  the  surface.  It  is  only  a  shade 
less  misleading,  though  many  shades  less  startling, 


340  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

to  represent  Caesar  as  a  virtuous  philanthropist  of 
abstemious  habits  who  perished  in  a  magnanimous 
effort  to  rescue  the  people  from  the  tyranny  of  the 
nobles.  The  people  in  the  modern  sense  were 
slaves,  and  the  Republic  at  least  ensured  that 
there  should  be  some  protection  against  military 
despotism,  to  which  in  due  course  its  abolition  led. 
That  Caesar  was  intellectually  among  the  greatest 
men  of  all  time  is  beyond  question.  Both  as 
strategist  and  as  historian  he  is  supreme.  His 
"  thrasonical  boast "  was  sober  truth,  and  he 
stands  above  military  or  literary  criticism,  a  lesson 
and  a  model.  But  he  was  steeped  in  all  the  vices 
of  his  age,  and  his  motive  was  personal  ambition. 
The  Republic  did  not  give  him  sufficient  scope, 
and  therefore  he  would  have  destroyed  it,  if  he  had 
not  been  himself  destroyed. 

Froude  adopted  the  position  of  a  great  German 
professor  and  historian,  Theodor  Mommsen,  whose 
prejudices  were  as  strong  as  his  learning  was 
profound.  He  went  with  Mommsen  in  adoration 
of  Caesar,  and  in  depreciation  of  Cicero.  That 
Cicero  used  one  sort  of  language  in  public  speeches, 
and  another  sort  in  private  correspondence,  is 
true,  and  is  notorious  because  some  of  his  most 
intimate  letters  have  been  preserved.  But  it  is 
not  peculiar  to  him.  The  man  who  talked  in 
public  as  he  talked  in  private  would  have  small 
sense  of  fitness.  The  man  who  talked  in  private 
as  he  talked  in  public  would  have  small  sense  of 
humour.  Although  Cicero's  humour  was  not 


BOOKS    AND    TRAVEL  341 

brilliant,  he  had  sufficient  taste  to  preserve  him 
from  pedantry  and  from  solecisms.     His  devotion 
to  the  Republic  was  perfectly  sincere ;  and  if  he 
changed  in  his  behaviour  to  Csesar,  it  was  because 
Caesar  changed  in  his  behaviour  to  the  Republic. 
Froude's  specific  charge  of  rapid  tergiversation 
is  disproved  by  dates.     The  speech  for  Marcellus, 
with  its  over-strained  flattery  of  the  conqueror, 
was  delivered,  not  "  within  a  few  weeks  of  his 
murder,"  but  eighteen  months  before  that  event, 
at  a    time  when  Cicero  still  hoped  that  Caesar 
would  be  moderate.     If  Cicero's  Republic  was  a 
narrow  oligarchy,  it  was  also  the  only  form  of 
constitutional  and  civilian  government  which  he 
knew  or  could  imagine.     He  failed  to  preserve 
it.     He  was  murdered  like  Caesar  himself.    Neither 
of  them  believed  that  political  assassination  was 
a  crime.     Cicero's   only  regret  was  that  Antony 
had  not  been  killed  with  Cesar.     Antony's  chief 
desire,  which  he  accomplished,  was  to  kill  Cicero. 
The  idea  that  Cicero  was  a  mere  declaimer,  who 
did   not  count,  never  occurred  either  to  Caesar 
or  to  Antony.     It  was  left  for  Professor  Mommsen 
to  discover.     Froude,  always  on  the  look-out  for 
examples  of  his  theory,  or  his  father's  theory,  that 
orators  must  be  useless  and  mistaken,  seized  it 
with  an   eager  grasp.     An  agreeable  looseness  of 
treatment  pervades  the  book,  and  "  patricians  " 
appear  as  wealthy  leaders  of  fashionable  society, 
being  in  fact  a  small  number  of  old  Roman  families, 
who  might  be  poor,  or  in  trade,  and  could  not 


342  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

legally  under  the  Republic  be  increased  in  number, 
resembling  rather  a  Hindu  caste  than  any  institu- 
tion of  Western  Christendom.  In  Caesar's  time 
they  had  almost  died  out,  and  the  aristocracy  of 
the  day  was  an  aristocracy  of  office.  The  book, 
however,  though  far  from  faultless,  though  in 
some  respects  misleading,  has  a  singular  fascina- 
tion, the  charm  of  a  picture  drawn  by  the  hand 
of  a  master  with  consummate  skill.  As  an 
historical  study,  what  the  French  call  une  etude,  it 
deserves  a  very  high  place,  and  it  contains  one 
sentence  which  all  democrats  would  do  well  to  learn: 

"  Popular  forms  are  possible  only  when  indi- 
vidual men  can  govern  their  own  lives  on  moral 
principles,  and  when  duty  is  of  more  importance 
than  pleasure,  and  justice  than  material  expe- 
diency." 

That  represents  the  best  side  of  Carlyle' s  teach- 
ing ;  the  subordination  of  material  objects,  the 
supremacy  of  the  moral  law. 

Carlyle,  however,  did  not  care  for  the  book,  as 
appears  in  the  following  letter  from  Froude  to 
Lady  Derby: 

"  April  26th,  1879. — You  are  a  most  kind 
critic.  If  I  have  succeeded  in  creating  interest 
in  so  old  a  subject  my  utmost  wishes  are  ac- 
complished. I  am  very  curious  indeed  to  hear 
what  Lord  D.  says.  I  can  guess  that  he  thinks 
I  ought  to  have  said  more  in  defence  of  the 
Constitutionalists,  and  that  I  have  hardly  used 
Cicero.  Carlyle  reduced  me  to  the  condition  of 


BOOKS    AND    TRAVEL  343 

a  'drenched  hen' — to  use  one  of  his  own  images. 
He  told  me  that  the  book  was  not  clear,  that 
'  he  got  no  good  of  it ' — in  fact,  that  it  was  '  a 
failure.'  It  may  be  a  failure,  but  'want  of  clear- 
ness' is  certainly  not  the  cause.  I  fancy  he 
wanted  something  else  which  he  did  not  find, 
and  he  would  not  give  himself  the  trouble  to 
examine  what  he  did  find." 

Froude  contributed  in  1880  to  Mr.  Morley's 
English  Men  of  Letters  a  critical  and  biographical 
sketch  of  Bunyan.  The  Pilgrim's  Progress,  as 
the  work  of  a  Dissenter,  had  been  excluded  from 
the  Rectory  at  Dartington.  But  Froude  was 
not  long  in  supplying  the  deficiency  for  himself, 
and  his  literary  appreciation  of  Bunyan's  style 
was  accompanied  by  a  sincere  sympathy  with 
the  Puritan  part  of  his  faith.  All  religious  people, 
he  thought,  might  find  common  ground  in  Bunyan, 
a  man  who  lived  for  religion,  and  for  nothing  else. 
Yet  even  here  Froude's  Erastianism,  and  respect 
for  authority,  come  into  play.  He  gravely  de- 
fends Bunyan's  imprisonment  in  Bedford  gaol, 
which  lasted,  with  some  intermissions,  from  1660 
to  1672,  as  necessary  to  enforce  respect  for  the 
law.  That  such  a  man  as  Charles  Stuart  should 
have  had  power  to  punish  such  a  man  as  John 
Bunyan  for  preaching  the  word  of  God  is  a 
strange  comment  on  the  nature  of  a  Christian 
country.  But  it  cannot  be  denied  that  Charles 
and  his  judges,  Sir  Matthew  Hale  among  them, 
provided  the  leisure  to  which  we  owe  the  best 


344  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

religious  allegories  in  the  language.  Nor  can  it  be 
said  that  Froude's  apology  for  the  confinement  of 
Bunyan  is  so  repugnant  to  reason  and  justice 
as  Gibbon's  apology  for  the  martyrdom  of  Cyprian. 

The  General  Election  of  1880  was  regarded  by 
Froude  with  mixed  feelings. 

"  I  am  glad,"  he  wrote  to  Lady  Derby  on  the 
Qth  of  April,  1880,  "  that  there  is  to  be  an  end 
of  '  glory  and  gunpowder/  but  my  feelings  about 
Gladstone  remain  where  they  were.  When  you 
came  into  power  in  1874,  I  dreamed  of  a  revival 
of  real  Conservatism  which  under  wiser  guiding 
might  and  would  have  lasted  to  the  end  of  the 
century.  This  is  gone — gone  for  ever.  The  old 
England  of  order  and  rational  government  is  past 
and  will  not  return.  Now  I  should  like  to  see  a 
moderate  triumvirate — Lord  Harrington,  Lord 
Granville,  and  your  husband,  with  a  Cabinet 
which  they  could  control.  This  too  may  easily  be 
among  the  impossibilities,  but  I  am  sure  that  at  the 
bottom  of  its  heart  the  country  wants  quiet,  and  a 
Liberal  revolutionary  sensationalism  will  be  just 
as  distasteful  to  reasonable  people  as  '  Asian 
Mysteries,'  tall  talk,  and  ambitious  buffooneries." 

Lord  Derby  became  more  and  more  Liberal, 
until  in  December,  1882,  he  joined  Mr.  Gladstone's 
Cabinet.  Before  that  decisive  step,  however,  it  be- 
came evident  in  which  direction  he  was  tending,  and 
Froude  wrote  to  Lady  Derby  on  the  5th  of  March : 

"  I  will  call  on  Tuesday  about  5.  I  have  not 
been  out  of  town,  but  my  afternoons  have  been 


BOOKS    AND    TRAVEL  345 

taken  up  with  a  multitude  of  small  engagements, 
and  indeed  I  have  been  sulky  too,  and  imagined 
Lord  D.  had  delivered  himself  over  to  the  enemy. 
But  what  right  have  I  to  say  anything  when  I 
am  going  this  evening  to  dine  with  Chamberlain  ? 
I  like  Chamberlain.  He  knows  his  mind.  There 
is  no  dust  in  his  eyes,  and  he  throws  no  dust  in 
the  eyes  of  others." 

Of  the  great  struggle  between  Lords  and  Com- 
mons over  the  franchise  in  1884,  Froude  wrote  to 
the  same  correspondent  on  the  3ist  of  July : 

"As  to  what  has  happened  since  I  went  away, 
I  for  my  own  humble  part  am  heartily  pleased, 
for  it  will  clear  the  air.  If  we  are  to  have  de- 
mocracy, as  I  suppose  we  are,  let  us  go  into  it 
with  our  eyes  open.  I  don't  like  drifting  among 
cataracts,  hiding  the  reality  from  ourselves  by 
forms  which  are  not  allowed  either  sense  or  power. 
That  I  suppose  to  be  Lord  Salisbury's  feeling.  I 
greatly  admired  his  speech  in  Cannon  Street,  which 
reminded  me  of  a  talk  I  had  with  him  long  ago  at 
Hatfield.  If  the  result  is  a  change  in  the  Consti- 
tution of  the  House  of  Lords  which  will  make  it 
a  real  power,  no  one  will  be  more  sorry  than 
Chamberlain,  whose  own  wish  is  to  keep  it  in  the 
condition  of  ornamental  helplessness.  Lord  Derby 
himself  can  hardly  wish  to  see  the  country  entirely 
in  the  hands  of  a  single  irresponsible  Chamber 
elected  by  universal  suffrage — and  of  such  a 
Chamber,  which  each  extension  of  the  suffrage 
brings  to  a  lower  intellectual  level." 


346  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

The  following  letter  was  written  from  Salcombe 
just  after  the  General  Election  of  1886  and  the 
defeat  of  Home  Rule  : 

"  A  Devonshire  farmer  fell  ill  of  typhus  fever 
once.  He  had  quarrelled  with  a  neighbour,  and 
the  clergyman  told  him  that  he  must  not  die  out 
of  charity,  and  must  see  the  man  and  shake  hands 
with  him.  He  agreed.  The  man  came.  They 
were  reconciled,  and  he  was  going  away  again 
when  the  sick  farmer  called  him  back  to  the  bed- 
side. '  Mind  you,'  he  said,  '  if  so  be  as  I  get 
over  this  here,  'tis  to  be  as  'twas.' 

"  I  am  sorry  to  see  we  are  taking  for  granted 
that  we  have  got  over  the  scare,  and  that  '  'tis  to 
be  as  'twas '  in  Parliament.  If  no  way  can  be 
found  of  giving  effect  to  the  feeling  of  the  country 
which  has  been  just  expressed,  the  old  enemy 
will  be  back  again  stronger  than  ever.  I,  for  my 
small  part,  shall  finally  despair  of  Parliamentary 
Government,  and  shall  pray  for  a  Chamberlain 
Dictatorship.  I  do  not  think  politicians  know 
how  slight  the  respect  which  is  now  generally  felt 
for  Parliament,  or  how  weary  sensible  people  have 
grown  of  it  and  its  factions. 

"  We  are  very  happy  down  here.  We  have 
lost  the  Molt,  but  have  a  very  tolerable  substitute 
for  it.  The  Halifaxes  are  at  the  Molt  themselves, 
and  considering  what  I  am,  and  that  he  is  the 
President  of  the  Church  Union,  I  think  he  and 
I  are  both  astonished  to  find  how  well  we  get 
on  together.  The  Colonists  come  next  week  to 


BOOKS   AND    TRAVEL  347 

Plymouth.  I  have  promised  to  meet  them.  Their 
dinner  will  be  the  exact  anniversary  of  the  arrival 
of  the  Armada  off  the  harbour.  That  was  the  be- 
ginning of  the  English  naval  greatness  and  of  the 
English  Colonial  Empire.  Think  of  poor  Oceana— 
75,000  copies  of  it  sold.  It  stands  for  something 
that  the  English  nation  is  interested  in.  ...  But 
I  must  not  try  your  eyes  any  further." 

It  was  in  1881  that  Froude,  whose  connection 
with  Fraser  had  ceased,  wrote  for  Good  Words 
the  series  of  papers  on  The  Oxford  Counter- 
Reformation  which  are  the  best  record  hitherto 
published  of  his  college  life.1  I  have  already 
referred  to  the  vivid  picture  of  John  Henry 
Newman  contained  in  one  of  them.  On  the  2nd 
of  March,  1881,  the  aged  Cardinal,  writing  from 
the  Birmingham  Oratory,  sent  a  gracious  message 
of  acknowledgment.  "  My  dear  Anthony  Froude," 
he  began,  "  I  have  seen  some  portions  of  what 
you  have  been  writing  about  me,  and  I  cannot 
help  sending  you  a  line  to  thank  you.  ...  I 
thank  you,  not  as  being  able  to  accept  all  you 
have  said  in  praise  of  me.  Of  course  I  can't.  Nor 
again  as  if  there  may  not  be  other  aspects  of  me 
which  you  cannot  praise,  and  which  you  may  in 
a  coming  chapter  of  your  publication  find  it  a 
duty,  whether  I  allow  them  or  not,  to  remark 
upon.  But  I  write  to  thank  you  for  such  an 
evidence  of  your  affectionate  feelings  towards 
me,  for  which  I  was  not  prepared,  and  which  has 

1  Short  Studies,  fourth  series,  pp.  192-206, 


348  LIFE   OF    FROUDE 

touched  me  very  much.  May  God's  fullest  bless- 
ings be  upon  you,  and  give  you  all  good.  Yours 
affectionately,  John  H.  Cardinal  Newman." 

Froude  carefully  kept  this  letter,  and,  remote  as 
their  opinions  were,  he  never  varied  in  his  loyal 
admiration  of  the  illustrious  Oratorian.  That 
admiration,  however,  was  purely  personal,  and 
did  not  affect  in  any  degree  the  staunchness 
of  Froude's  principles.  In  1883  Protestant 
Germany  celebrated  the  four  hundredth  anni- 
versary of  Luther's  birth,  and  Froude  wrote  for 
the  occasion  a  short  biography  of  the  rebellious 
monk  who  changed  the  history  of  the  world. 
Founded  on  the  larger  Life  by  Julius  Koestlin, 
which  had  then  just  appeared,  this  little  book 
makes  no  pretence  to  original  learning  or  research. 
It  is  a  polemical  pamphlet  by  a  master  of  English, 
and  a  fervent  admirer  of  the  illustrious  Martin. 
' '  When  the  German  states  revolted  against  the 
Roman  hierarchy,"  says  Froude  in  his  Preface, 
"we  in  England  revolted  also,"  and  Luther's 
name  was  as  familiar  as  Bunyan's  to  the  Protestant 
Churches  of  England.  The  Catholic  revival  of 
which  Froude  had  seen  so  much  at  Oxford  was 
still  in  full  swing. 

"  Nevertheless,  we  are  still  a  Protestant  nation, 
and  the  majority  of  us  intend  to  remain  Protestant. 
If  we  are  indifferent  to  our  Smithfield  and  Oxford 
martyrs,  we  are  not  indifferent  to  the  Reformation, 
and  we  can  join  with  Germany  in  paying  respect 
to  the  memory  of  a  man  to  whom  we  also,  in  part, 


BOOKS    AND    TRAVEL  349 

owe  our  deliverance.  Without  Luther  there  would 
have  been  either  no  change  in  England  in  the 
sixteenth  century,  or  a  change  purely  political. 
Luther's  was  one  of  those  great  individualities 
which  have  modelled  the  history  of  mankind,  and 
modelled  it  entirely  for  good.  He  revived  and 
maintained  the  spirit  of  piety  and  reverence 
in  which,  and  by  which  alone,  real  progress  is 
possible." 

Such  was  the  temper  in  which  Froude  set 
about  his  task,  and  which  made  it  a  labour  of 
love.  Besides  the  great  public  events  in  Luther's 
career  which  are  familiar  to  all,  he  gave  a  charming 
picture  of  the  affectionate  father,  the  genial 
host,  the  eloquent,  humourous  talker  whose 
fragments  of  conversation,  his  Tischreden,  are 
in  Germany  almost  as  popular  as  his  hymns. 
Luther's  dominant  quality  was  force,  and  that 
was  a  quality  which  Froude,  like  Carlyle,  honoured 
above  all  others.  Luther  was  not  in  all  respects 
like  a  modern  Protestant.  He  had  a  great  respect 
for  authority,  when  it  was  genuine,  and  he  believed 
in  transubstantiation,  which  Leo  X.  regarded 
as  a  juggle  to  deceive  the  vulgar.  If  Luther's 
appearance  before  the  Diet  of  Worms  was,  as 
Froude  says,  "  the  finest  scene  in  human  history/* 
it  is  so  because  this  solitary  monk  stood  not 
for  one  form  of  religion  against  another,  but 
for  truth  against  falsehood,  for  earnest  belief 
in  divine  things  against  a  Church  governed 
by  unbelievers.  The  Renaissance  in  its  most 


350  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

Pagan  form  had  invaded  the  Vatican,  and  the 
Vicar  of  Christ  appeared  to  Luther  as  Anti- 
Christ  himself.  If  Charles  V.  had  been  Pope, 
and  Leo  X.  had  been  emperor,  we  might  never 
have  heard  of  Luther.  Froude  sincerely  respected 
Charles  V.,  and  held  that  Protestant  historians 
had  done  him  less  than  justice.  Although  Charles 
opposed  the  Reformation,  he  opposed  it  honestly, 
and  his  faith  in  his  own  religion  was  absolute.  He 
was  a  Christian  gentleman.  As  he  entered  Witten- 
berg after  the  battle  of  Mahlberg,  some  bishop 
asked  him  to  dig  up  Luther's  body  and  burn 
it.  "  I  war  not  with  the  dead,"  he  replied, 
perhaps  remembering  the  grand  old  Roman  line 

Nullum  cum  victis  certamen,  et  aethere  cassis. 

One  valuable  truth  Froude  had  learned  not 
from  Carlyle,  but  from  study  of  the  past,  and 
from  his  own  observation  at  the  Cape.  "  If," 
he  wrote  in  Ccesary  "  there  be  one  lesson  which 
history  clearly  teaches,  it  is  this,  that  free  nations 
cannot  govern  subject  provinces.  If  they  are 
unable  or  unwilling  to  admit  their  dependencies 
to  share  their  constitution,  the  constitution  itself 
will  fall  in  pieces  from  mere  incompetence  for 
its  duties."  A  critic  in  The  Quarterly  Review 
expressed  a  hope  that  this  would  not  prove  to 
be  true  of  India.  But  Froude  was  not  thinking  of 
India.  He  had  in  his  mind  the  self-governing 
Colonies,  whose  fortunes  and  future  were  to 
him  a  source  of^  perpetual  interest.  He  loved 


BOOKS    AND    TRAVEL  351 

travel,  and  as  soon  as  he  had  shaken  off  the 
burden  of  Carlyle  he  took  a  voyage  round  the 
world,  described,  not  always  with  topical  accuracy, 
in  Oceana.  The  name  of  this  delightful  volume 
is  of  course  taken  from  Harrington,  More's  suc- 
cessor in  the  days  of  the  Commonwealth.  The 
contents  were  a  characteristic  mixture  of  history, 
speculation,  and  personal  experience.  Froude 
had  a  fixed  idea  that  English  politicians,  especially 
Liberal  politicians,  wanted  to  get  rid  of  the 
Colonies.  Else  why  had  they  withdrawn  British 
troops  from  Canada  and  New  Zealand  ?  He 
could  not  see,  perhaps  they  did  not  all  see  them- 
selves, that  to  give  the  Colonies  complete  freedom, 
and  to  insist  upon  their  providing,  except  so  far 
as  the  Navy  was  concerned,  for  their  own  defence, 
would  strengthen,  not  weaken,  the  tie.  In  proof 
of  his  theory  he  produced  some  singular  evidence, 
comprising  one  of  the  strangest  stories  that  ever 
was  told.  He  heard  it,  so  he  informs  us,  from  Sir 
Arthur  Helps,  and  reproduces  it  in  his  own  words. 
"  A  Government  had  gone  out ;  Lord  Palmer- 
ston  was  forming  a  new  Ministry,  and  in  a  pre- 
liminary Council  was  arranging  the  composition 
of  it.  He  had  filled  up  the  other  places.  He  was 
at  a  loss  for  a  Colonial  Secretary.  This  name 
and  that  was  suggested,  and  thrown  aside.  At 
last  he  said,  '  I  suppose  I  must  take  the  thing 
myself.  Come  upstairs  with  me,  Helps,  when 
the  Council  is  over.  We  will  look  at  the  maps, 
and  you  shall  show  me  where  these  places  are.'  ' 


352  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

If  Froude's  memory  of  this  anecdote  be  accurate, 
Helps  must,  for  once,  have  been  drawing  upon 
his  imagination.  As  Clerk  of  the  Council,  he 
had  no  more  to  do  with  forming  Cabinets  than 
with  appointing  bishops.  Palmerston  was  never 
Colonial  Secretary  in  his  life ;  and  among  his 
faults  as  a  Minister,  which  were  positive  rather 
than  negative,  ignorance  of  political  geography 
was  certainly  not  included.  Many  people,  how- 
ever, especially  the  Tariff  Reform  League,  will 
consider  that  the  passage  which  immediately 
succeeds  proves  Froude  to  have  been  in  advance  of 
his  age.  For  he  argues  that  trade  follows  the 
flag,  because  "  our  colonists  take  three  times  as 
much  of  our  productions  in  proportion  to  their 
number  as  foreigners  take."  A  tour  through  the 
Colonies  for  the  purpose  of  conversing  with  their 
most  influential  statesmen  had  long  been  one  of 
his  cherished  plans.  Hitherto  he  had  got  no 
farther  than  the  Cape,  where,  as  we  have  seen, 
he  became  entangled  in  South  African  politics, 
and  had  to  repeat  his  visit.  Now  he  was  bound 
for  Australasia,  and  on  the  6th  of  December,  1884, 
he  left  Tilbury  Docks,  with  his  son  Ashley,  in  an 
Aberdeen  packet  of  four  thousand  tons.  His  love 
of  the  sea,  Elizabethan  in  its  intensity,  was 
heightened  by  his  enjoyment  of  Greek  literature, 
especially  the  Odyssey,  which  he  considered  ideal 
reading  for  a  ship,  and,  as  it  surely  is,  on  ship  or 
on  shore,  an  incomparable  tale  of  adventure. 

Before  the  end  of  the  year  Froude  was  at  Cape 


BOOKS   AND   TRAVEL  353 

Town,  renewing  his  acquaintance  with  familiar 
scenes.  Many  of  his  former  friends  were  dead, 
and  his  courteous  enemy,  now  Sir  John  Molteno, 
had  left  Cape  Town  as  well  as  public  life.  The 
Prime  Minister  was  Mr.  Upington,  a  clever 
lawyer,  afterwards  Sir  Thomas  Upington,  and  the 
chief  topic  was  Sir  Charles  Warren's  expedition 
to  Bechuanaland,  which  happily  did  not  end  in 
war,  as  Upington  apprehended  that  it  would.  Sir 
Hercules  Robinson  was  Governor  and  High  Com- 
missioner, a  man  after  Froude's  heart,  "too  upright 
to  belong  to  any  party,"  and  thoroughly  apprecia- 
tive of  all  that  was  best  in  the  Boers.  This  time 
Froude's  stay  was  a  short  one,  and  early  in  1885  he 
was  at  Melbourne.  Here  the  burning  question  was 
the  German  occupation  of  New  Guinea,  for  which 
Colonial  opinion  held  Gladstone's  Government, 
and  Lord  Derby  in  particular,  responsible.  On 
the  other  hand,  Lord  Derby  had  suggested 
Australian  Federation,  which  received  a  good  deal 
of  support,  though  it  led  to  nothing  at  the  time. 
On  one  point  Froude  seems  always  to  have  met 
with  sympathy.  Abuse  of  Gladstone  never  failed 
to  elicit  a  favourable  response,  and  the  news  of 
Gordon's  death  was  an  opportunity  not  to  be 
wasted.  But  when  there  came  rumours  of 
a  possible  war  with  Russia  over  the  Afghan 
frontier,  Froude  took  the  side  of  Russia,  or  at  all 
events  of  peace,  and  contended  with  his  Tory 
companion,  Lord  Elphinstone,  who  was  for  war. 
In  New  Zealand  he  visited  the  venerable  Sir 
(2310)  23 


354  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

George  Grey,  who  had  violated  all  precedent  by 
entering  local  politics,  and  becoming  Prime 
Minister,  after  the  Duke  of  Buckingham  had 
recalled  him  from  the  Governorship  of  the  Colony. 
He  was  not  equally  successful  in  his  second 
career,  and  Froude' s  unqualified  praise  of  him 
was  resented  by  many  New  Zealanders.  That 
the  Colonies  would  be  true  to  the  mother  country 
if  the  mother  country  were  true  to  them  was 
the  safe  if  somewhat  vague  conclusion  at  which 
the  returning  traveller  arrived.  He  came  home 
by  America,  and  met  with  a  more  formidable 
antagonist  than  his  old  assailant  Father  Burke, 
in  the  shape  of  a  terrific  blizzard. 

But  hardships  had  no  deterring  effect  upon 
Froude,  and  his  love  of  travel,  like  his  love  of  the 
classics,  suffered  no  diminution  while  strength 
remained.  He  returned  from  the  Antipodes  early 
in  1885.  Before  1886  was  out  he  had  started  on 
a  voyage  to  the  West  Indies,  so  that  his  survey 
of  our  Colonial  possessions  might  be  complete. 
Ardent  imperialist  as  he  was,  Froude  was  not  less 
fully  alive  than  Mr.  Goldwin  Smith  to  the  diffi- 
culties inherent  in  a  policy  of  Imperial  Federation. 
"  All  of  us  are  united  at  present,"  he  had  written 
in  Oceana,1  "  by  the  invisible  bonds  of  relationship 
and  of  affection  for  our  common  country,  for  our 
common  sovereign,  and  for  our  joint  spiritual 
inheritance.  These  links  are  growing,  and  if  let 
alone  will  continue  to  grow,  and  the  free  fibres 

'.p.  393- 


BOOKS    AND    TRAVEL  355 

will  of  themselves  become  a  rope  of  steel.  A 
federation  contrived  by  politicians  would  snap  at 
the  first  strain."  Australian  Federation,  which 
Froude  did  not  live  to  see,  was  no  contrivance 
of  politicians,  but  the  result  of  spontaneous  opinion 
generated  in  Australia,  and  ratified  as  a  matter 
of  course  by  Parliament  at  home. 

The  West  Indian  Islands  had  an  especial  fascina- 
tion for  Froude  ron  account  of  the  great  naval 
exploits  of  Rodney,  Hood,  and  other  British 
sailors.  •  Kingsley's  At  Last  had  revived  his  in- 
terest in  them ;  and  though  Kingsley  had  long  been 
dead,  his  memory  was  fresh  among  all  who  knew 
him.  The  diary  which  Froude  kept  during  this 
journey  has  been  preserved,  and  I  am  enabled 
to  make  a  few  extracts  from  it.  On  the  last  day 
of  1886,  while  he  was  crossing  the  Bay  of  Biscay, 
he  meditated  upon  the  subject  which  occupied 
Cicero  at  an  earlier  period  of  his  life.  "  Last  day 
of  the  year.  One  more  gone  of  the  few  which  can 
now  remain  to  me.  Old  age  is  not  what  I  looked 
for.  It  is  much  pleasanter.  Physically,  except 
that  I  cannot  run,  or  jump,  or  dance,  I  do  not 
feel  much  difference,  and  I  don't  want  to  do  those 
things.  Spirits  are  better.  Life  itself  has  less 
worries  with  it,  and  seems  prettier  and  truer 
to  me  now  that  I  can  look  at  it  objectively,  without 
hopes  and  anxieties  on  my  own  account.  I  have 
nothing  to  expect  in  this  world  in  the  way  of  good. 
It  has  given  me  all  that  it  will  or  can.  I  am 
less  liable  to  illusions.  One  knows  by  experience 


356  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

that  nothing  is  so  good  or  so  bad  as  one  has 
fancied,  and  that  what  is  to  be  will  be  mainly 
what  has  been.  So  many  of  one's  friends  are 
dead  !  Yes,  but  one  will  soon  die  too.  Each 
friend  gone  is  the  cutting  a  link  which  would  have 
made  death  painful.  It  loses  its  terror  as  it  draws 
nearer,  especially  when  one  thinks  what  it  would 
be  if  one  were  not  allowed  to  die."  Tennyson  has 
expressed  in  Tithonus  the  idea  at  which  Froude 
glances,  and  from  which  he  averts  his  gaze. 
Carlyle's  senility  was  not  enviable,  and  even  that 
sturdy  veteran  Stratford  Canning  l  told  Gladstone 
that  longevity  was  "  not  a  blessing."  Like 
Cephalus  at  the  opening  of  Plato's  Republic,  Froude 
found  that  he  could  see  more  clearly  when  the 
mists  of  sentiment  were  dispersed. 

While  at  sea  Froude  pursued  his  favourite 
musings  on  the  worthlessness  of  all  orators,  from 
Demosthenes  and  Cicero  to  Burke  and  Fox,  from 
Burke  and  Fox  to  Gladstone  and  Bright.  The 
world  was  conveniently  divided  into  talking  men 
and  acting  men.  Gladstone  had  never  done  any- 
thing. He  had  always  talked. 

"  I  wonder  whether  people  will  ever  open  their 
eyes  about  all  this.  The  orators  go  in  for  virtue, 
freedom,  etc.,  the  cheap  cant  which  will  charm 
the  constituencies.  They  are  generous  with  what 
costs  them  nothing — Irish  land,  religious  liberty, 
emancipation  of  niggers — sacrificing  the  depen- 
dencies to  tickle  the  vanity  of  an  English  mob 

1  Lord  Stratford  de  JRedcliffe. 


BOOKS    AND    TRAVEL  357 

and  catch  the  praises  of  the  newspapers.  If  ever 
the  tide  turns,  surely  the  first  step  will  be  to 
hang  the  great  misleaders  of  the  people — as  the 
pirates  used  to  be — along  the  House  of  Commons 
terrace  by  the  river  as  a  sign  to  mankind,  and 
send  the  rest  for  ever  back  into  silence  and  im- 
potence." 

Whether  a  man  be  a  pirate  is  a  matter  of  fact. 
Whether  he  be  a  misleader  of  the  people  is  a 
matter  of  opinion.  "  Whom  shall  we  hang  ?  " 
would  become  a  party  question,  and  perhaps  a 
general  amnesty  for  mere  debaters  is  the  most 
practical  solution  of  the  problem. 

Barbados,  which  has  since  suffered  severely 
from  the  want  of  a  market  for  its  sugar,  seemed 
to  Froude's  eyes  to  present  in  a  sort  of  comic 
picture  the  summit  of  human  felicity.  "  Swarms 
of  niggers  on  board — delightful  fat  woman  in 
blue  calico  with  a  sailor  straw  hat,  and  a  pipe 
in  her  mouth.  All  of  them  perfectly  happy, 
without  a  notion  of  morality — piously  given 
too — psalm-singing,  doing  all  they  please  without 
scruple,  rarely  married,  for  easiness  of  parting, 
looking  as  if  they  never  knew  a  care.  .  .  . 
Niggerdom  perfect  happiness.  Schopenhauer 
should  come  here."  Schopenhauer  would  perhaps 
have  said  that  "  niggers "  were  happier  than 
other  men  because  they  come  nearer  to  the 
beasts. 

As  Froude  has  been  accused  of  injustice  to  the 
Church  of  Rome,  it  may  be  as  well  to  quote  an 


358  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

entry  from  his  journal  at  Trinidad : l  "  Went  to 
Roman  Catholic  Cathedral — saw  a  few  coloured 
men  and  women  on  their  knees  at  solitary  prayers 
— much  better  for  them  than  Methodist  addresses 
on  salvation." 

In  another  place  he  says : 2  "  Religion  as  a 
motive  alters  the  aspect  of  everything — so  much 
of  the  world  rescued  from  Rome  and  the  great 
enemy.  Yet  the  Roman  Church  after  all  is  some- 
thing. It  is  a  cause  and  a  home  everywhere— 
something  to  care  for  outside  oneself — an  interest 
—something  which  does  not  change." 

Again  at  Barbados,  on  the  I7th  of  February, 
he  writes  :  "  By  far  the  most  prosperous  of  the 
upper  classes  that  I  have  seen  in  the  islands 
are  the  Roman  Catholic  priests  and  bishops. 
They  stand,  step,  and  speak  out  with  as  fine  a 
consciousness  of  power  as  in  Ireland  itself.  .  .  . 
Large,  authoritative,  dignified,  with  their  long 
sweeping  robes.  The  old  thing  is  getting  fast 
on  its  feet  again.  The  philosophers  and  critics 
have  done  for  Protestantism  as  a  positive,  manly, 
and  intellectually  credible  explanation  of  the 
world.  The  old  organism  and  old  superstition 
steps  into  its  ancient  dominion — finding  it  swept 
and  garnished." 

In  San  Domingo  at  sunrise  Froude's  medi- 
tations were  far  from  cheerful :  "  The  sense  of 
natural  beauty  is  nothing  where  man  is  degraded." 
So  far  Bishop  Heber  in  a  well-known  couplet. 

1  January  isth,  1887.  *  February  ist. 


BOOKS   AND   TRAVEL  359 

Froude  proceeds :  "  The  perception  of  beauty 
is  the  perception  of  something  which  is  acting 
upon  and  elevating  the  intellectual  nature.  .  .  . 
It  is  connected  with  hope,  connected  with  the 
consciousness  of  the  noble  element  in  the 
human  soul ;  and  where  it  is  unperceived,  or 
where  there  is  none  to  perceive  it,  or  where  it 
falls  dead,  and  fails  in  its  effect,  the  solitary  eye 
which  gazes  will  find  no  pleasure,  no  joy — only 
distress — as  for  something  calling  to  him  out  of  a 
visionary  world  from  which  his  own  race  is  shut 
out.  We  cannot  feel  healthily  alone.  The  sense 
of  worship,  the  sense  of  beauty,  the  sense  of  sight, 
is  only  alive  and  keen  when  shared  by  others.  .  .  . 
It  is  something  not  alone,  but  generated  by  the 
action  of  the  object  on  the  soul.  Thus  in  these 
islands  there  is  only  sadness.  In  New  Zealand 
there  was  hope  and  life." 

A  passage  from  the  diary  concerning  the 
appointment  of  Colonial  Governors  will  be  regarded 
by  all  official  persons  as  obsolete. 

"  The  English  nation,  if  they  wish  to  keep  the 
Colonies,  ought  to  insist  on  proper  men  being 
chosen  as  Governors.  .  .  .  The  Colonial  Office 
is  not  to  blame  and  will  only  be  grateful  for  an 
expression  of  opinion  which  will  enable  them  to 
answer  pressure  upon  them  with  a  peremptory 
1  Impossible'  Court  influence,  party  influence, 
party  convenience,  all  equally  injurious.  A  noble 
lord  is  out  at  elbows  ;  give  him  a  Governorship  of 
a  Colony.  A  party  politician  must  be  disappointed 


360  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

in  arrangements  at  home  ;  console  him  with  a 
Colony.  The  Colonists  feel  that  no  respect  is 
felt  for  them  ;  anybody  will  do  for  a  Colony ; 
and  whether  it  is  a  Crown  Colony,  or  a  Colony 
with  responsible  government  of  its  own,  the  effect 
is  equally  mischievous.  In  fact,  while  they 
continue  liable,  and  occasionally  subject,  to  treat- 
ment of  this  kind,  the  feelings  insensibly  generate 
which  will  lead  in  the  end  to  separation." 

The  immediate  consequence  of  Froude's  West 
Indian  travels  was  his  well-known  book  The 
English  in  the  West  Indies,  to  which  he  gave  as 
a  second  title,  one  that  he  himself  preferred, 
The  Bow  of  Ulysses.  It  was  illustrated  from 
his  own  sketches,  for  he  had  inherited  that 
gift  from  his  father.  Being  often  controversial 
in  tone,  and  not  always  accurate  in  description, 
it  provoked  numerous  criticisms,  though  not  of 
the  sort  which  interfere  with  success.  In  every- 
thing Froude  wrote,  though  least  of  all  in  his 
History,  allowance  has  to  be  made  for  the 
personal  equation.  He  had  not  Carlyle's  memory, 
nor  his  unfailing  accuracy  of  eye.  Where  he 
wrote  from  mere  recollection,  deserting  the  safe 
ground  of  his  diary,  he  was  liable  to  error,  and 
few  men  of  letters  have  been  less  capable  of 
producing  a  trustworthy  guide  book.  The  value 
of  Oceana  and  The  Bow  of  Ulysses  is  alto- 
gether different.  They  are  the  characteristic 
reflections  of  an  intensely  vivid,  highly  culti- 
vated mind,  bringing  out  of  its  treasure-house 


BOOKS    AND   TRAVEL  361 

things  new  and  old.  "  The  King  knows  your 
book,"  it  was  said  to  Montaigne,  "  and  would 
like  to  know  you."  "  If  the  King  knows  my 
book,"  replied  the  philosopher,  "  he  knows  me." 
Froude  is  in  his  books,  especially  in  his  books 
of  travel,  for  in  [them,  more  than  anywhere 
else,  he  thinks  aloud.  There  are  strange  people 
in  the  world.  One  of  them  criticised  Froude  in 
an  obituary  notice  because,  when  he  went  to 
Jamaica,  he  sat  in  the  shade  reading  Dante  while 
he  might  have  been  studying  the  Jamaican 
Constitution.  There  may  be  those  who  would 
study  the  Jamaican  Constitution,  what  there 
is  of  it,  in  the  sun,  while  they  might,  if  they 
could,  read  Dante  in  the  shade,  and  the  necrologist 
in  question  may  be  one  of  them.  Froude  did 
not  go  to  study  Constitutions,  which  he  could 
have  studied  at  home.  He  went  to  see  for 
himself  what  the  West  Indian  Colonies  were  like, 
and  his  incorrigible  habit  of  reading  the  best 
literature  did  not  forsake  him  even  in  tropical 
climates.  He  cared  only  too  little  for  Con- 
stitutions even  when  they  were  his  proper  business, 
as  they  certainly  were  not  in  Jamaica.  The 
object  of  The  English  in  the  West  Indies  is  to  make 
people  at  home  feel  an  interest  in  their  West  Indian 
fellow-subjects,  and  that  it  did  by  the  mere  fact 
of  its  circulation.  His  belief  that  the  West  Indies 
should  be  governed,  like  the  East  Indies,  des- 
potically, is  a  subsidiary  matter,  and  the  quaint 
parody  of  the  Athanasian  Creed  in  which  he 


362  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

epitomised  what  he  supposed  to  be  the  Radical 
faith  is  merely  an  intellectual  amusement.  On 
the  virtues  of  Rodney,  and  the  future  of  the 
Colonies,  he  is  serious,  though  scarcely  practical. 

"  Imperial  Federation,"  he  wrote  in  1887,  "  is 
far  away,  if  ever  it  is  to  be  realised  at  all.  If 
it  is  to  come  it  will  come  of  itself,  brought  about 
by  circumstances  and  silent  impulses  working 
continuously  through  many  years  unseen  and 
unspoken  of.  It  is  conceivable  that  Great  Britain 
and  her  scattered  offspring,  under  the  pressure  of 
danger  from  without,  or  impelled  by  some  general 
purpose,  might  agree  to  place  themselves  under 
a  single  administrative  head.  It  is  conceivable 
that  out  of  a  combination  so  formed,  if  it  led  to 
a  successful  immediate  result,  some  union  of  a 
closer  kind  might  eventually  emerge.  It  is  not 
only  conceivable,  but  it  is  entirely  certain,  that 
attempts  made  when  no  such  occasion  has  arisen, 
by  politicians  ambitious  of  distinguishing  them- 
selves, will  fail,  and  in  failing  will  make  the  object 
that  is  aimed  at  more  confessedly  unattainable 
than  it  is  now."  l 

So  far  Froude's  predictions  have  been  realised. 
When  he  wrote,  the  Imperial  Federation  League 
had  just  been  formed,  and  Lord  Rosebery  was 
arguing  for  Irish  Home  Rule  as  part  of  a  much 
wider  scheme.  Except  Australia,  which  is  homo- 
geneous, like  the  Dominion  of  Canada,  the  British 
Empire  is  no  nearer  Federation,  and  Ireland  is 

1  English  in  the  West  Indies,  p.  168. 


BOOKS    AND    TRAVEL  363 

no  nearer  Home  Rule,  than  they  were  then. 
The  depression  of  the  sugar  trade  in  the  West 
Indian  Islands  has  been  met  by  a  treaty  which 
raises  the  price  of  sugar  at  home,  and  makes  those 
Colonies  proportionately  unpopular  with  the  work- 
ing classes.  It  has  since  been  proposed  to 
carry  the  principle  farther,  and  tax  the  British 
workman  for  the  benefit  of  Colonial  manu- 
facturers. For  these  strange  results  of  imperial 
thinking  neither  Froude  nor  any  of  his  con- 
temporaries were  prepared.  But  they  correspond 
accurately,  especially  the  second  of  them,  with  the 
"  attempt  made  by  politicians  ambitious  of  dis- 
tinguishing themselves,"  against  which  Froude 
warned  his  countrymen.  Froude  was  no  scientific 
economist.  He  believed  in  "  free  trade  within 
the  Empire,"  which  is  not  free  trade.  He 
was  for  an  imperial  tariff,  a  thing  made  in 
Germany,  and  called  a  Zollverein.  But  his 
practical  experience  and  personal  observation 
taught  him  that  proposals  for  closer  union 
with  the  Colonies  must  come  from  the  Colonies 
themselves.  The  negroes  were  a  difficulty.  They 
were  not  really  fit  for  self-government,  as  the 
statesmen  of  the  American  Union  had  found. 
Personal  freedom,  the  inalienable  right  of  all  men 
and  all  women,  is  a  very  different  thing  from  the 
possession  of  a  vote.  As  for  India,  the  idea  of 
Home  Rule  there  had  receded  a  long  way  into 
the  distance  since  the  sanguine  predictions  of 
Macaulay.  Perhaps  Froude  never  quite  worked 


364  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

out  his  conceptions  of  the  federal  system  which  he 
would  have  liked  to  see.  In  Australia  it  would 
have  been  plain  sailing.  In  Canada  it  was  already 
established.  In  South  Africa  it  would  have 
embodied  the  union  of  British  with  Dutch,  and 
prevented  the  disasters  which  have  since  occurred. 
In  the  West  Indies  it  would  have  raised  problems 
of  race  and  colour  which  are  more  prudently 
agitated  at  a  greater  distance  from  the  Black 
Republic  of  Hayti.  Imperial  Federalists  have 
not  yet  explained  what  they  would  do  with 
India. 

Froude  neither  was  nor  aimed  at  being  a 
practical  politican.  His  object,  in  which  he 
succeeded,  was  to  kindle  in  the  public  mind  at 
home  that  imaginative  enthusiasm  for  the  Colonial 
idea  of  which  his  own  heart  was  full.  Although 
the  measure  of  Colonial  loyalty  was  given  after- 
wards in  the  South  African  War,  the  despatch 
of  troops  from  Sydney  to  the  Soudan  in  1885 
showed  that  ties  of  sentiment  are  the  strongest 
of  all.  It  was  those  ties,  rather  than  any  political 
or  commercial  bond,  which  Froude  desired  to 
strengthen.  No  one  would  have  liked  less  to 
live  in  a  Colony.  Colonial  society  did  not  suit 
him.  Colonial  manners  were  not  to  his  mind. 
But  to  meet  governing  men,  like  Sir  Henry 
Norman,  a  "  warm  Gladstonian,"  by  the  way, 
was  always  a  pleasure  to  him,  and  as  a  symbol 
of  England's  greatness  he  loved  her  territory 
beyond  the  seas. 


BOOKS    AND    TRAVEL  365 

The  Two  Chiefs  of  Dunboy,  published  in  1889, 
was  Froude's  one  mature  and  serious  attempt 
at  a  novel.  For  distinction  of  style  and  beauty 
of  thought  it  may  be  compared  with  the  greatest 
of  historical  romances.  If  it  was  the  least  suc- 
cessful of  his  books,  the  failure  can  be  assigned 
to  the  absence  of  women,  or  at  least  of  love, 
which  ever  since  Dr.  Johnson's  definition,  if  not 
before,  has  been  expected  in  a  novel.  The  scene 
is  laid  in  the  neighbourhood  of  his  favourite 
Derreen,  and  the  period  is  the  middle  of  the 
eighteenth  century.  The  real  hero  is  an  English 
Protestant,  Colonel  Goring.  Goring  "  belonged 
to  an  order  of  men  who,  if  they  had  been  allowed 
fair  play,  would  have  made  the  sorrows  of  Ireland 
the  memory  of  an  evil  dream ;  but  he  had  come 
too  late,  the  spirit  of  the  Cromwellians  had  died 
out  of  the  land,  and  was  not  to  be  revived  by 
a  single  enthusiast."  He  was  murdered,  and 
Froude  could  point  his  favourite  moral  that 
the  woes  of  the  sister  country  would  be  healed 
by  the  appearance  of  another  Cromwell,  which 
he  had  to  admit  was  improbable.  The  Irish 
hero,  Morty  Sullivan,  has  been  in  France,  and 
is  ready  to  fight  for  the  Pretender.  He  did  no 
good.  Few  Irishmen,  in  Froude's  opinion,  ever 
did  any  good.  But  in  The  Two  Chiefs  of  Dunboy, 
if  anywhere,  Froude  shows  his  sympathy  with 
the  softness  of  the  Irish  character,  and  Morty's 
meditations  on  his  return  from  France  are  ex- 
pressed as  only  Froude  could  express  them.  Morty 


366  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

was  walking  with  his  sister  by  the  estuary  of  the 
Kenmare  River  opposite  Derrynane,  afterwards 
famous   as    the   residence   of   Daniel   O'Connell. 
"  For  how  many  ages  had  the  bay  and  the  rocks 
and    the    mountains    looked    exactly    the    same 
as  they  were  looking  then  ?     How  many  genera- 
tions had  played  their  part  on  the  same  stage, 
eager  and  impassioned  as  if  it  had  been  erected 
only    for    them !     The    half-naked   fishermen    of 
forgotten   centuries   who   had   earned    a   scanty 
living  there ;    the  monks  from  the  Skelligs  who 
had  come  in  on  high  days  in  their  coracles  to 
say  mass  for  them,  baptize  the  children,  or  bury 
the   dead ;    the   Celtic   chief,   with  saffron  shirt 
and  battle-axe,  driven  from  his  richer  lands  by 
Norman   or   Saxon  invaders,   and  keeping  hold 
in  this  remote  spot  on  his  ragged  independence ; 
the   Scandinavian   pirates,   the   overflow   of   the 
Northern    Fiords,    looking    for    new    soil    where 
they    could    take    root.     These    had    all    played 
their  brief  parts  there  and  were  gone,  and  as  many 
more  would  follow   in  the   cycles  of  the  years 
that  were  to  come,  yet  the  scene  itself  was  un- 
changed and  would  not  change.     The  same  soil 
had  fed  those  that  were  departed,  and  would  feed 
those    that    were    to    be.     The    same    landscape 
had  affected  their  imaginations  with  its  beauty 
or  awed  them  with  its  splendours ;    and  each 
alike  had  yielded  to  the  same  delusion  that  the 
valley  was  theirs  and  was  inseparably  connected 
with    themselves    and    their    fortunes.     Morty's 


BOOKS    AND    TRAVEL  367 

career  had  been  a  stormy  one.  ...  He  had  gone 
out  into  the  world,  and  had  battled  and  struggled 
in  the  holy  cause,  yet  the  cause  was  not  advanced, 
and  it  was  all  nothing.  He  was  about  to  leave 
the  old  place,  probably  for  ever.  Yet  there  it 
was,  tranquil,  calm,  indifferent  whether  he  came 
or  went.  What  was  he  ?  What  was  any  one  ? 
To  what  purpose  the  ineffectual  strivings  of 
short-lived  humanity  ?  Man's  life  was  but  the 
shadow  of  a  dream,  and  his  work  was  but  the 
heaping  of  sand  which  the  next  tide  would  level 
flat  again." 

Wordsworth's  "  pathetic  fallacy "  that  the 
moods  of  nature  correspond  with  the  moods  of 
man  has  seldom  found  such  eloquent  illustration 
as  in  Morty's  vain  imaginings.  Morty  himself 
was  shot  dead  by  English  soldiers  in  revenge  for 
the  murder  of  Goring.  The  story  is  a  dismal 
and  tragic  one.  But  the  best  qualities  of  the 
Irish  race  are  there,  depicted  with  true  sympathy, 
and  perhaps  this  volume  may  be  held  to  confirm 
Carlyle's  opinion,  expressed  in  a  letter  to  Miss 
Davenport  Bromley,  that  even  The  English  in 
Ireland  was  "  more  disgraceful  to  the  English 
Government  by  far  than  to  the  Irish  savageries." 
Froude,  indeed,  never  forgot  the  kindness  of  the 
Kerry  peasants  who  nursed  him  through  the  small- 
pox. He  would  have  done  anything  for  the  Irish, 
except  allow  them  to  govern  themselves. 

In  1890  Froude  contributed  to  the  series  of 
The  Queen's  Prime  Ministers,  edited  by  Mr.  Stuart 


368  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

Reid,  a  biographical  study  of  Lord  Beaconsfield. 
He  wrote  to  Mr.  Reid  on  the  subject  : 

".  .  .  Lord  Beaconsfield  wore  a  mask  to  the 
generality  of  mankind.  It  was  only  when  I  read 
Lothair  that  I  could  form  any  notion  to  myself 
of  the  personality  which  was  behind.  I  once 
alluded  to  that  book  in  a  speech  at  a  Royal 
Academy  banquet.  Lord  Beaconsfield  waspresent, 
and  was  so  far  interested  in  what  I  said  that  he 
wished  me  to  review  Endymion  in  the  Edinburgh, 
and  sent  me  the  proof-sheets  of  it  before  publica- 
tion. Edymion  did  not  take  hold  of  me  as  Lothair 
did,  and  I  declined,  but  I  have  never  lost  the 
impression  which  I  gathered  out  of  Lothair.  It 
is  worse  than  useless  to  attempt  the  biography 
of  a  man  unless  you  know,  or  think  you  know, 
what  his  inner  nature  was.  ...  I  am  quite  sure 
that  Lord  Beaconsfield  had  a  clearer  insight 
than  most  men  into  the  contemporary  constitu- 
tion of  Europe — that  he  had  a  real  interest  in 
the  welfare  and  prospects  of  mankind ;  and  while 
perhaps  he  rather  despised  the  great  English 
aristocracy,  he  probably  thought  better  of  them 
than  of  any  other  class  in  England.  I  suppose 
that  like  Cicero  he  wished  to  excel,  or  perhaps 
more  like  Augustus  to  play  his  part  well  in  the 
tragic  comedy  of  life.  I  do  not  suppose  that  he 
had  any  vulgar  ambition  at  all.  .  .  ." 

The  feelings  with  which  he  approached  this 
not  altogether  congenial  task  are  described  in  the 
following  passages  from  letters  to  Lady  Derby  : 


BOOKS    AND   TRAVEL  369 

•  "  THE  MOLT,  September  i^th,  1889. 

"  If  my  wonderful  adventure  into  the  Beacons- 
field  country  comes  off,  I  shall  want  all  the  help 
which  Lord  D.  offered  to  give  me.  I  do  not 
wonder  that  he  and  you  were  both  startled  at 
the  proposition,  and  I  am  not  at  all  sure  that  in 
a  respectable  series  of  Victorian  Prime  Ministers 
I  should  be  allowed  to  treat  the  subject  in  the 
way  that  I  wish.  The  point  is  to  make  out  what 
there  was  behind  the  mask.  Had  it  not  been  for 
Lothair  I  should  have  said  nothing  but  a  char- 
latan. But  that  altered  my  opinion,  and  the 
more  often  I  read  it  the  more  I  want  to  know 
what  his  real  nature  was.  The  early  life  is  a 
blank  filled  up  by  imaginative  people  out  of 
Vivian  Grey.  I  am  feeling  my  way  indirectly 
with  his  brother,  Ralph  D' Israeli,  and  whether  I 
go  on  or  not  will  depend  on  whether  he  will  help 
me." 

"THE  MOLT,  November  12th,   1889. 

"  The  difficulty  is  to  find  out  the  real  man  that 
lay  behind  the  sphynx-like  affectations.  I  have 
come  to  think  that  these  affectations  (natural  at 
first)  came  to  be  themselves  affected  as  a  useful 
defensive  armour  which  covered  the  vital  parts. 
Anyway,  the  study  of  him  is  extremely  amusing. 
I  had  nothing  else  to  do,  and  I  can  easily  throw 
what  I  write  into  the  fire  if  it  turns  out  unsatis- 
factory." 

Although  the  book  was  necessarily  a  short  one, 

(S3 10)  24 


370  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

it  is  too  characteristic  to  be  lightly  dismissed. 
When  Froude  gave  Mr.  Reid  the  manuscript,  he 
said,  "  It  will  please  neither  Disraeli's  friends  nor 
his  foes.  But  it  is  at  least  an  honest  book."  He 
heard,  with  more  amusement  than  satisfaction, 
that  it  had  pleased  Gladstone.  For  the  political 
estimate  of  a  modern  and  Parliamentary  states- 
man Froude  lacked  some  indispensable  quali- 
fications. He  knew  little,  and  cared  less, 
about  the  House  of  Commons,  in  which  the  best 
years  of  Disraeli's  life  were  passed.  He  despised 
the  party  system,  of  which  Disraeli  was  at 
once  a  product  and  a  devotee.  He  had  no  sym- 
pathy with  Lord  Beaconsfield's  foreign  policy, 
and  the  colonial  policy  which  he  would  have  sub- 
stituted for  it  was  outside  Lord  Beaconsfield's 
scope.  He  had  adopted  from  Carlyle  the  theory 
that  Disraeli  and  Gladstone  were  both  adventurers, 
the  difference  between  them  being  that  Disraeli 
only  deceived  others,  whereas  Gladstone  deceived 
also  himself.  But  Gladstone  had  ignored  Carlyle, 
whereas  Disraeli,  with  singular  magnanimity,  had 
offered  to  the  author  of  Shooting  Niagara  a 
pension  and  a  Grand  Cross  of  the  Bath. 

It  was,  however,  as  a  man  of  letters  rather  than 
as  a  politician  that  Disraeli  fascinated  Froude, 
so  much  so  that  he  is  betrayed  into  the  paradox 
of  representing  his  hero  as  a  lover  of  literature 
rather  than  politics.  Disraeli  sometimes  talked 
in  that  way  himself,  as  when  he  was  persuading 
Lightfoot  to  accept  the  Bishopric  of  Durham, 


BOOKS    AND    TRAVEL  371 

and  remarked,  "I,  too,  have  sacrificed  inclina- 
tion to  duty."  But  he  was  hardly  serious, 
and  even  in  his  novels  it  is  the  political  parts 
that  survive.  Although  Froude  had  found  it 
impossible  to  review  Endymion.  the  book  is 
very  like  the  author,  and  can  only  be  appre- 
ciated by  those  who  have  been  behind  the 
scenes  in  politics.  Froude' s  idea  of  Disraeli  as 
a  man  with  a  great  opportunity  who  threw  it 
away,  who  might  have  pacified  Ireland  and 
preferred  to  quarrel  with  Russia,  was  naturally 
not  agreeable  to  Disraelites,  and  as  a  general 
rule  it  is  desirable  that  a  biographer  should  be 
able  to  write  from  his  victim's  point  of  view. 
Yet,  all  said  and  done,  Froude's  Beaconsfield  is 
a  work  of  genius,  the  gem  of  the  series.  Pro- 
fessional politicians,  with  the  curious  exception 
of  Gladstone,  thought  very  little  of  it.  It  was 
not  written  for  them.  Disraeli  was  a  many-sided 
man,  so  that  there  is  room  for  various  estimates 
of  his  character  and  career.  Of  his  early  life 
Froude  had  no  special  knowledge.  He  was  not 
even  aware  that  Disraeli  had  applied  for  office 
to  Peel.  He  shows  sometimes  an  indifference 
to  dry  details,  as  when  he  makes  Gladstone 
dissolve  Parliament  in  1873  immediately  after 
his  defeat  on  the  Irish  University  Bill,  and  repre- 
sents Russia  as  having  by  her  own  act  repealed 
the  Black  Sea  Clauses  in  the  Treaty  of  Paris. 
Startling  too  is  his  assertion  that  the  Parliament 
of  1868  did  nothing  for  England  or  Scotland,  on 


372  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

account  of  its  absorption  in  Irish  affairs.  But 
he  was  not  writing  a  formal  history,  and  these 
points  did  not  appeal  to  him  at  all.  He  drew 
with  inimitable  skill  a  picture  of  the  despised 
and  fantastic  Jew,  vain  as  a  peacock  and  absurdly 
dressed,  alien  in  race  and  in  his  real  creed,  smiling 
sardonically  at  English  ways,  enthusiasms,  and 
institutions,  until  he  became,  after  years  of 
struggle  and  obloquy,  the  idol  of  what  was  then 
the  proudest  aristocracy  in  the  world. 

Disraeli's  peculiar  humour  just  suited  Froude's 
taste.     Disraeli  never  laughed.     Even  his  smile 
was  half  inward.    The  irony  of  life,  and  of  his 
own   position,    was    a  subject    of    inexhaustible 
amusement   to  him.     There  was   nothing  in  his 
nature  low,  sordid,  or  petty.     It  was  not  money, 
nor  rank,  but  power  which  he  coveted,  and  at 
which   he   aimed.      Irreproachable    in   domestic 
life,   faithful   in   friendship,   a   placable    enemy, 
undaunted  by  failure,  accepting  final  defeat  with 
philosophic  calm,  he  played  with  political  passions 
which  he  did  not  share,  and  made  use  of  pre- 
judices which  he   did  not   feel.      Froude   loved 
him,  as  he  loved  Reineke  Fuchs,  for   his  weird 
incongruity  with  everything  stuffy  and  common- 
place.    From  a  constitutional  history  of  English 
politics     Disraeli     might    almost     be     omitted. 
His    Reform    Act    was    not    his   own,    and    his 
own  ideas  were  seldom  translated  into  practice. 
In   any  political   romance   of   the  Victorian  age 
he    would    be    the    principal    figure.       In    the 


BOOKS    AND    TRAVEL  373 

Congress  of  Berlin,  where  he  did  nothing,  or 
next  to  nothing,  he  attracted  the  gaze  of  every 
one,  not  for  anything  he  said  there,  but  because 
he  was  there  at  all.  If  he  had  left  an  auto- 
biography, it  would  be  priceless,  not  for  its  facts, 
but  for  its  opinions.  That  Froude  thoroughly 
understood  him  it  would  be  rash  to  say.  But 
he  did  perceive  by  sympathetic  intuition  a  great 
deal  that  an  ordinary  writer  would  have  missed 
altogether.  For  instance,  the  full  humour  of 
that  singular  occasion  when  Benjamin  Disraeli 
appeared  on  the  platform  of  a  Diocesan  Conference 
at  Oxford,  with  Samuel  Wilberforce  in  the  chair, 
could  have  been  given  by  no  one  else  exactly  as 
Froude  gave  it.  Nothing  like  it  had  ever  happened 
before.  It  is  scarcely  possible  that  anything  of 
the  kind  can  ever  happen  again.  Froude  found 
the  origin  of  the  Established  Church  in  the  statutes 
of  Henry  VIII.  Gladstone  found  it,  or  seemed 
to  find  it,  in  the  poems  of  Homer.  In  Disraeli's 
eyes  its  pedigree  was  Semitic,  and  it  ministered 
to  the  "  craving  credulity  "  of  a  sceptical  age, 
undisturbed  by  the  provincial  arrogance  that 
flashed  or  flared  in  an  essay  or  review. 

"  In  the  year  1864,"  says  Froude,  "  Disraeli 
happened  to  be  on  a  visit  at  Cuddesdon,  and  it 
happened  equally  that  a  Diocesan  Conference  was 
to  be  held  at  Oxford  at  the  time,  with  Bishop 
Wilberforce  in  the  chair.  The  clerical  mind  had 
been  doubly  exercised,  by  the  appearance  of 
Colenso  on  the  '  Pentateuch  '  and  Darwin  on  the 


374  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

'  Origin  of  Species.'  Disraeli,  to  the  surprise  of 
every  one,  presented  himself  in  the  theatre.  He 
had  long  abandoned  the  satins  and  silks  of  his 
youth,  but  he  was  as  careful  of  effect  as  he  had 
ever  been,  and  had  prepared  himself  in  a  costume 
elaborately  negligent.  He  lounged  into  the 
assembly  in  a  black  velvet  shooting-coat  and  a 
wide-awake  hat,  as  if  he  had  been  accidentally 
passing  through  the  town.  It  was  the  fashion 
with  University  intellect  to  despise  Disraeli  as 
a  man  with  neither  sweetness  nor  light ;  but  he 
was  famous,  or  at  least  notorious,  and  when  he 
rose  to  speak  there  was  a  general  curiosity.  He 
began  in  his  usual  affected  manner,  slowly  and 
rather  pompously,  as  if  he  had  nothing  to  say 
beyond  perfunctory  platitudes.  The  Oxford  wits 
began  to  compare  themselves  favourably  with 
the  dullness  of  Parliamentary  orators  ;  when  first 
one  sentence  and  then  another  startled  them 
into  attention.  They  were  told  that  the  Church 
was  not  likely  to  be  disestablished.  It  would 
remain,  but  would  remain  subject  to  a  Parliament 
which  would  not  allow  an  imperium  in  imperio. 
It  must  exert  itself  and  reassert  its  authority, 
but  within  the  limits  which  the  law  laid  down. 
The  interest  grew  deeper  when  he  came  to  touch 
on  the  parties  to  one  or  other  of  which  all 
his  listeners  belonged.  High  Church  and  Low 
Church  were  historical  and  intelligible,  but 
there  had  arisen  lately,  the  speaker  said,  a 
party  called  the  Broad,  never  before  heard  of. 


BOOKS   AND   TRAVEL  375 

He  went  on  to  explain  what  Broad  Churchmen 
were." 

Disraeli's  gibes  at  Colenso  and  Maurice  are  too 
well  known  to  need  repetition  here.  The  equally 
famous  reference  to  Darwin  will  bear  to  be  quoted 
once  more,  at  least  as  an  introduction  for  Froude's 
incisive  comment. 

"  What  is  the  question  now  placed  before  society 
with  a  glibness  the  most  astounding  ?  The  ques- 
tion is  this  :  Is  man  an  ape  or  an  angel  ?  I,  my 
lord,  am  on  the  side  of  the  angels." 

"  Mr.  Disraeli,"  so  Froude  continues,  "  is  on 
the  side  of  the  angels.     Pit  and  gallery  echoed 
with  laughter.     Fellows  and  tutors  repeated  the 
phrase  over  their  port  in  the  common  room  with 
shaking  sides.     The  newspapers  carried  the  an- 
nouncement the  next   morning  over  the  length 
and  breadth  of  the  island,  and  the  leading  article 
writers  struggled  in  their  comments  to  maintain 
a  decent  gravity.     Did  Disraeli  mean  it,  or  was 
it  but  an  idle  jest  ?  and  what  must  a  man  be 
who  could  exercise  his  wit  on  such  a  subject  ? 
Disraeli  was  at  least  as  much  in  earnest  as  his 
audience.     The  phrase  answered  its  purpose.     It 
has  lived  and  become  historical  when  the  decorous 
protests  of  professional  divines  have  been  forgotten 
with  the  breath  which  uttered  them.     The  note 
of  scorn   with   which   it   rings  has  preserved  it 
better  than  any  affectation  of  pious  horror,  which 
indeed  would  have  been  out  of  place  in  the  presence 
of  such  an  assembly." 


376  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

I  have  taken  the  liberty  of  giving  such  emphasis 
as  italics  can  confer  to  two  brief  passages  in  this 
brilliant  description,  because  they  express  Froude's 
real  opinion  of  Diocesan  Conferences  and  those  who 
frequented  them.1  Disraeli's  audience  applauded, 
partly  in  admiration  of  his  wit,  and  partly  because 
they  thought  that  he  was  amusing  them  at  the 
expense  of  the  latitudinarians  they  abhorred. 
Froude's  appreciation  came  from  an  opposite 
source.  He  regarded  Disraeli  not  as  a  flatterer, 
but  as  a  busy  mocker,  laughing  at  the  people  who 
thought  he  was  laughing  with  them.  He  made 
no  attempt  at  a  really  critical  estimate  of  the 
most  baffling  figure  in  English  politics.  He 
fastened  on  the  picturesque  aspects  of  Disraeli's 
career,  and  touched  them  with  an  artist's  hand. 
As  to  what  it  all  meant,  or  whether  it  meant 
anything,  he  left  his  readers  as  much  in  the  dark 
as  they  were  before.  My  own  theory,  if  one  must 
have  a  theory,  is  that  one  word  explains  Disraeli, 
and  that  that  word  is  "  ambition."  If  so,  he  was 
one  of  the  most  marvellously  successful  men  that 
ever  lived.  If  not,  and  if  a  different  standard 
should  be  applied,  other  consequences  would  ensue. 
Froude  gives  no  help  in  the  solution  of  the  problem. 
What  he  does  is  to  portray  the  original  genius 
which  no  absurdities  could  cover,  and  no  obstacles 
could  restrain.  Disraeli  the  "  Imperialist "  had 
no  more  to  do  with  building  empires  than  with 

1  Disraeli's  contempt  for  italics  is  well  known.  He  called 
them  "  the  last  resort  of  the  forcible  Peebles." 


BOOKS    AND   TRAVEL  377 

building  churches,  but  he  was  twice  Prime  Minister 
of  England. 

Froude's  Sea  Studies  in  the  third  series  of  his 
collected  essays  are  chiefly  a  series  of  thoughts  on 
the  plays  of  Euripides.  But,  like  so  much  of  his 
writing,  they  are  redolent  of  the  ocean,  on  which 
and  near  which  he  always  felt  at  home.  The 
opening  sentences  of  this  fresh  and  wholesome 
paper  are  too  characteristic  not  to  be  quoted. 

'  To  a  man  of  middle  age  whose  occupations 
have  long  confined  him  to  the  unexhilarating 
atmosphere  of  a  library,  there  is  something  un- 
speakably delightful  in  a  sea  voyage.  Increasing 
years,  if  they  bring  little  else  that  is  agreeable 
with  them,  bring  to  some  of  us  immunity  from 
sea-sickness.  The  regularity  of  habit  on  board 
a  ship,  the  absence  of  dinner  parties,  the  exchange 
of  the  table  in  the  close  room  for  the  open  deck 
under  an  awning,  and  the  ever-flowing  breeze 
which  the  motion  of  the  vessel  forbids  to  sink 
into  a  calm,  give  vigour  to  the  tired  system, 
restore  the  conscious  enjoyment  of  elastic  health, 
and  even  mock  us  for  the  moment  with  the  belief 
that  age  is  an  illusion,  and  that '  the  wild  freshness  ' 
of  the  morning  of  life  has  not  yet  passed  away 
for  ever.  Above  our  heads  is  the  arch  of  the  sky, 
around  us  the  ocean,  rolling  free  and  fresh  as  it 
rolled  a  million  years  ago,  and  our  spirits  catch  a 
contagion  from  the  elements.  Our  step  on  the 
boards  recovers  its  buoyancy.  We  are  rocked 
to  rest  at  night  by  a  gentle  movement  which 


378  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

soothes  you  into  the  dreamless  sleep  of  childhood, 
and  we  wake  with  the  certainty  that  we  are  beyond 
the  reach  of  the  postman.  We  are  shut  off,  as 
in  a  Catholic  retreat,  from  the  worries  and  anxieties 
of  the  world." 

This  is  not  the  language  of  a  man  who  ever 
suffered  seriously  from  sea-sickness,  and  Froude's 
face  had  an  open-air  look  which  never  suggested 
"  the  unexhilarating  atmosphere  of  a  library." 
But  he  was  of  course  a  laborious  student,  and 
nothing  refreshed  him  like  a  voyage.  On  the 
yacht  of  his  old  friend  Lord  Ducie,  as  enthusiastic 
a  sailor  and  fisherman  as  himself,  he  made  several 
journeys  to  Norway,  and  caught  plenty  of  big 
salmon.  He  has  done  ample  justice  to  these 
expeditions  in  the  last  volume  of  his  essays, 
which  contains  The  Spanish  Story  of  the  Armada. 
A  country  where  the  mountains  are  impassable, 
and  the  fiords  the  only  roads,  just  suited  his  taste. 
It  even  inspired  him  with  a  poem,  Romsdal  Fiord, 
which  appeared  in  Blackwood  for  April,  1883,  and 
it  gave  him  health,  which  is  not  always,  like 
poetry,  a  pure  gift  of  nature. 

The  life  of  society,  and  of  towns,  never  satisfied 
Froude.  Apart  from  his  genius  and  his  training, 
he  was  a  country  gentleman,  and  felt  most  at 
home  when  he  was  out  of  doors. 

From  Panshanger  he  wrote  to  Lady  Derby  : 

"  How  well  I  understand  what  you  felt  sitting 
on  the  top  of  the  Pyrenees.  We  men  are  but  a 
sorry  part  of  the  creation,  Now  and  then  there 


BOOKS    AND    TRAVEL  379 

comes  to  us  a  breath  out  of  another  order  of 
things  ;   a  sudden  perception — coming  we  cannot 
tell  how — of  the  artificial  and  contemptible  exist- 
ence we  are  all  living  ;    a  longing  to  be  out  of  it 
and  have  done  with  it — by  a  pistol-shot  if  nothing 
else  will  do.     I  continually  wonder  at  myself  for 
remaining  in   London   when   I   can  go  where   I 
please,  and  take  with  me  all  the  occupations  I 
am  fit  for.     Alas  !    it  is  oneself  that  one  wants 
really  to  be  rid  of.     If  we  did  not  ourselves  share 
in  the  passions  and  follies  that  are  working  round 
us  we  should  not  be  touched  by  them.     I  have 
made  up  my  mind  to  leave  it  all,  at  all  events,  as 
soon  as  Mr.  Carlyle  is  gone;  but  the  enchantment 
which  scenery,  grand  or  beautiful,  or  which  simple 
country   life   promises   at   a  distance,  will  never 
abide — let   us   be   where   we   will.     It   comes  in 
moments  like  a  revelation ;  like  the  faces  of  those 
whom  we  have  loved  and  lost ;  which  pass  before 
us,  and  we  stretch  our  hands  to  clasp  them  and 
they  are  gone.     I  came  here  yesterday  for  two 
or  three  days.     The  house  is  full  of  the  young 
generation.     They  don't   attract  me.  .  .  .  What- 
ever their  faults,  diffidence  is  not  one  of  them. 
Macaulay's  doctrine  of  the  natural  superiority  of 
each  new  generation  to  its  predecessor  seems  most 
heartily  accepted  and  believed.     The  superb  pic- 
tures in  the  house  are  a  silent  protest  against  the 
cant  of  progress.     You  look  into  the  faces  of  the 
men  and  the  women  on  the  walls  and  can  scarcely 
believe  they  are  the  same  race  with  us.     I  have 


380  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

sometimes  thought  '  the  numbers  '  of  the  elect 
have  been  really  fulfilled,  and  that  the  rest  of  us 
are  left  to  gibber  away  an  existence  back  into  an 
apehood  which  we  now  recognise  as  our  real 
primitive  type." 

From  the  Molt,  on  the  other  hand,  he  wrote  : 
"It  is  near  midnight.  I  have  just  come  in 
from  the  terrace.  The  moon  is  full  over  the  sea, 
which  is  glittering  as  if  it  was  molten  gold.  The 
rocks  and  promontories  stand  out  clear  and 
ghost-like.  There  is  not  a  breath  to  rustle  the 
leaves  or  to  stir  the  painted  wash  upon  the  shore. 
Men  and  men's  doings,  and  their  speeches  and 
idle  excitement,  seem  all  poor,  transient,  and 
contemptible.  Sea  and  rocks  and  moonlight 
looked  just  as  they  look  to-night  before  Adam 
sinned  in  Paradise.  They  remain — we  come  and 
go,  hardly  more  enduring  than  the  moth  that 
flutters  in  through  the  window,  and  we  are  hardly 
of  more  consequence." 


CHAPTER    X 

THE   OXFORD   PROFESSORSHIP 

ON  the   i6th  of  March,   1892,  Froude's  old 
antagonist,  Freeman,  who  had  been  Regius 
Professor    of   Modern    History  at    Oxford  since 
Stubbs's  elevation  to  the  Episcopal  Bench  in  1884, 
died  suddenly  in  Spain.     The  Prime  Minister,  who 
was  also  Chancellor  of  the  University,  offered  the 
vacant  Chair  to  Froude,  and  after  some  hesitation 
Froude  accepted  it.     The  doubt  was  due  to  his 
age.     "  There  are   seventy-four  reasons    against 
it,"    he    said.      Fortunately   he   yielded.     "  The 
temptation    of   going  back   to   Oxford   in   a  re- 
spectable way,"  he  wrote  to  Skelton,  "  was  too 
much  for  me.      I  must  just  do  the  best  I  can, 
and  trust  that  I  shall  not  be  haunted  by  Free- 
man's ghost."     Lord  Salisbury  did  a  bold  thing 
when  he  appointed  Froude  successor  to  Freeman. 
Froude  had  indeed  a  more  than  European  repu- 
tation as    a  man   of  letters,   and   was   acknow- 
ledged to  be  a  master  of  English  prose.     But  he 
was  seventy-four,  five  years  older  than  Freeman, 
and  he  had  never  taught  in  his  life,  except  as  tutor 
for  a  very  brief    time  in  two  private   families. 
The  Historical  School  at  Oxford  had  been  trained 

381 


382  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

to  believe  that  Stubbs  was  the  great  historian, 
that  Freeman  was  his  prophet,  and  that  Froude 
was  not  an  historian  at  all.  Lord  Salisbury  of 
course  knew  better,  for  it  was  at  Hatfield  that  some 
of  Froude' s  most  thorough  historical  work  had 
been  done.  Still,  it  required  some  courage  to 
fly  in  the  face  of  all  that  was  pedantic  in  Oxford, 
and  to  nominate  in  Freeman's  room  the  writer 
that  Freeman  had  spent  the  best  years  of  his  life 
in  "  belabouring."  Some  critics  attributed  the 
selection  to  Lord  Salisbury's  sardonic  humour, 
or  pronounced  that,  as  Lamb  said  of  Coleridge's 
metaphysics,  "  it  was  only  his  fun."  Some  stig- 
matised it  as  a  party  job.  Gladstone's  nominee, 
Freeman,  had  been  a  Home  Ruler,  Froude  was  a 
Unionist ;  what  could  be  clearer  than  the  motive  ? 
But  both  nominations  could  be  defended  on  their 
own  merits,  and  a  Regius  Professorship  should 
not  be  the  monopoly  of  a  clique. 

Lord  Salisbury's  choice  of  Froude  was  indeed, 
like  Lord  Rosebery's  subsequent  choice  of 
Lord  Acton  for  Cambridge,  an  example  which 
justified  the  patronage  of  the  Crown.  A  Prime 
Minister  has  more  courage  than  an  academic 
board,  and  is  guided  by  larger  considerations. 
Froude  was  one  of  the  most  distinguished  among 
living  Oxonians,  and  yet  Oxford  had  not  even 
given  him  an  honorary  degree.  Membership  of 
the  Scottish  Universities  Commission  in  1876  was 
the  only  official  acknowledgment  of  his  services 
to  culture  that  he  had  ever  received,  and  that  was 


THE    OXFORD    PROFESSORSHIP     383 

more  of  an  obligation  than  a  compliment. 
'  Froude,"  said  Jowett,  "  is  a  man  of  genius. 
He  has  been  abominably  treated."  Lord  Salisbury 
had  made  amends.  Himself  a  man  of  the  highest 
intellectual  distinction,  apart  from  the  offices  he 
happened  to  hold,  he  had  promoted  Froude  to 
great  honour  in  the  place  he  loved  best,  and  the 
most  eminent  of  living  English  historians  returned 
to  Oxford  in  the  character  which  was  his  due. 

The  new  Professor  gave  up  his  house  in  London; 
and  settled  at  Cherwell  Edge,  near  the  famous 
bathing-place  called  Parson's  Pleasure.1  He  found 
the  University  a  totally  different  place  from  what 
it  was  when  he  first  knew  it.  Dr.  Arnold,  who  died 
in  1842,  the  year  after  his  appointment,  was  the 
earliest  Professor  whose  lectures  were  famous, 
or  were  attended,  and  Dr.  Arnold  did  exactly  as 
he  pleased.  There  was  no  Board  of  Studies  to 
supervise  him,  and  it  was  thought  rather  good  of 
a  Professor  to  lecture  at  all.  Now  the  Board  of 
Studies  was  omnipotent,  and  a  Professor's  time  was 
not  his  own.  He  was  bound  in  fact  to  give  forty- 
two  lectures  in  a  year,  and  to  lecture  twice  a  week 
for  seven  weeks  in  two  terms  out  of  the  three. 
The  prospect  appalled  him.  "  I  never,"  he  wrote 
to  Max  Miiller, 2  "  I  never  gave  a  lecture  on  an 
historical  subject  without  a  fortnight  or  three 
weeks  of  preparation,  and  to  undertake  to 
deliver  forty-two  such  lectures  in  six  months 

1  The  house  is  now,  oddly  enough,  a  Catholic  convent. 
1  April  1 8th,   1892. 


384  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

would  be  to  undertake  an  impossibility.  If  the 
University  is  to  get  any  good  out  of  me,  I  must 
work  in  my  own  way."  He  did  not,  however, 
work  in  his  own  way,  and  the  University  got  a 
great  deal  of  good  out  of  him  all  the  same. 

Lord  Salisbury,  in  making  Froude  the  offer,  spoke 
apologetically  of  the  stipend  as  small,  but  added 
that  the  work  would  be  light.  The  accomplished 
Chancellor  was  imperfectly  informed.  The  stipend 
was  small  enough  :  the  work  was  extremely  hard 
for  a  man  of  seventy-four.  Froude's  conscien- 
tiousness in  preparation  was  almost  excessive. 
Every  lecture  was  written  out  twice  from  notes  for 
improvement  of  style  and  matter.  His  audiences 
were  naturally  large,  for  not  since  the  days  of 
Mr.  Goldwin  Smith,  who  resigned  in  1866,  had 
anything  like  Froude's  lectures  been  heard  at 
Oxford.  When  I  was  an  undergraduate,  in  the 
seventies,  we  all  of  course  knew  that  Professor 
Stubbs  had  a  European  reputation  for  learning. 
But,  except  to  those  reading  for  the  History 
School,  Stubbs  was  a  name,  and  nothing  more. 
Nobody  ever  dreamt  of  going  to  hear  him.  Crowds 
flocked  to  hear  Froude,  as  in  my  time  they  flocked 
to  hear  Ruskin. 

One  sex  was  as  well  represented  as  the  other. 
Froude  had  left  the  dons  celibate  and  clerical. 
He  found  them,  for  the  most  part,  married  and  lay. 
There  was  every  variety  of  opinion  in  the  common 
rooms,  and  every  variety  of  perambulators  in  the 
parks.  London  hours  had  been  adopted,  and 


THE    OXFORD    PROFESSORSHIP     385 

the  society,  though  by  no  means  frivolous  or 
ostentatious,  was  anything  rather  than  monastic. 
At  Oxford,  as  in  London,  Froude  was  almost 
always  the  best  talker  in  the  room.  He  had 
travelled,  not  so  much  in  Europe  as  in  America 
and  the  more  distant  parts  of  the  British  Empire. 
He  had  read  almost  everything,  and  known 
almost  every  one.  His  boyish  enthusiasm  for 
deeds  of  adventure  was  not  abated.  He  be- 
lieved in  soldiers  and  sailors,  especially  sailors. 
Creeds,  Parliaments,  and  constitutions  did  not 
greatly  attract  or  keenly  interest  him.  Old  as 
he  was  by  the  almanac,  he  retained  the  buoyant 
freshness  of  youth,  and  loved  watching  the  eights 
on  the  river  as  much  as  any  undergraduate. 
The  chapel  services,  especially  at  Magdalen, 
brought  back  old  times  and  tastes.  As  Professor 
of  History  he  became  a  Fellow  of  Oriel,  where  he 
had  been  a  commoner  in  the  thick  of  the  Oxford 
Movement.  If  the  Tract arian  tutors  could  have 
heard  the  conversation  of  their  successors,  they 
would  have  been  astonished  and  perplexed.  Even 
the  Essayists  and  Reviewers  would  have  been  in- 
clined to  wish  that  some  things  could  be  taken 
for  granted.  Modern  Oxford  was  not  altogether 
congenial  to  Froude.  While  he  could  not 
be  called  orthodox,  he  detested  materialism, 
and  felt  sympathy,  if  not  agreement,  with 
Evangelical  Protestants.  Like  Bacon,  he  would 
rather  believe  all  the  legends  of  the  Talmud  than 
that  this  universal  frame  was  without  a  mind. 

25 


386  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

Of  the  questions  which  absorbed  High  Church- 
men he  said,  "  One  might  as  well  be  interested 
in  the  amours  of  the  heathen  gods."  On  the 
other  hand,  he  had  no  sympathy  with  the  new 
school  of  specialists,  the  devotees  of  original 
research.  He  believed  in  education  as  a  training 
of  the  mental  faculties,  and  thought  that  under- 
graduates should  learn  to  use  their  own  minds. 
"  I  can  see  what  books  the  boys  have  read,"  he 
observed,  after  examining  for  the  Arnold  Essay 
Prize,  "  but  I  cannot  see  that  they  make  any  use 
of  what  they  have  read.  They  seem  to  have  no 
power  of  assimilation."  The  study  of  authorities 
at  first  hand,  to  which  he  had  given  so  much  of 
his  own  time,  he  regarded  as  the  work  of  a  few, 
and  as  occupation  for  later  years.  The  faculty  of 
thinking,  and  the  art  of  writing,  could  not  be 
learned  too  soon. 

Few  indeed  were  the  old  friends  who  remained 
at  Oxford  to  welcome  him  back.  Max  Miiller 
was  the  most  intimate  of  them,  and  among  his 
few  surviving  contemporaries  was  Bartholomew 
Price,  Master  of  Pembroke,  a  clergyman  more 
distinguished  in  mathematics  than  in  theology. 
The  Rector  of  Exeter l  gave  a  cordial  welcome 
to  the  most  illustrious  of  its  former  Fellows.  The 
Provost  of  Oriel 2  was  equally  gracious.  In 
the  younger  generation  of  Heads  his  chief  friends 
were  the  Dean  of  Christ  Church,3  now  Bishop  of 
Oxford,  and  the  President  of  Magdalen.4  But 

1  Dr.  Jackson.       *  Mr.  Monro.       3  Dr.  Paget.       4  Mr.  Warren. 


THE    OXFORD    PROFESSORSHIP     387 

the  Oxford  of  1892  was  so  unlike  the  Oxford  of 
1849  that  Froude  might  well  feel  like  one  of  the 
Seven  Sleepers  of  Ephesus.  And  if  there  had 
been  many  changes  in  Oxford,  there  had  been 
some  also  in  himself.  He  had  long  ceased  to  be, 
so  far  as  he  ever  was,  a  clergyman.  He  had  been 
twice  married,  and  twice  left  a  widower.  His 
children  had  grown  up.  His  fame  as  an  author 
extended  far  beyond  the  limits  of  his  own  country, 
and  of  Europe.  He  had  made  Carlyle's  acquaint- 
ance, become  his  intimate  friend,  and  written 
a  biography  of  him  which  numbered  as  many 
readers  as  The  French  Revolution  itself.  He 
had  lectured  in  the  United  States,  and  challenged 
the  representatives  of  Irish  Nationalism  on  the 
history  of  their  own  land.  He  had  visited  most 
of  the  British  Colonies,  and  promoted  to  the 
best  of  his  ability  the  Federation  of  South  Africa. 
Few  men  had  seen  more,  or  read  more,  or  enjoyed 
a  wider  experience  of  the  world.  What  were 
the  lessons  which  after  such  a  life  he  chiefly 
desired  to  teach  young  Englishmen  who  were 
studying  the  past  ?  The  value  of  their  religious 
reformation,  and  the  achievements  of  their  naval 
heroes.  The  Authorised  Version  and  the  Navy 
were  in  his  mind  the  symbols  of  England's  great- 
ness. Greater  Britain,  including  Britain  beyond 
the  seas,  was  the  goal  of  his  hopes  for  the  future 
progress  of  the  race.  There  were  in  Oxford 
more  learned  men  than  Froude,  Max  Miiller  for 
one.  There  was  not  a  single  Professor,  or  tutor, 


388  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

who  could  compare  with  him  for  the  multitude 
and  variety  of  his  experience.  Undergraduates 
were  fascinated  by  him,  as  everybody  else  was. 
The  dignitaries  of  the  place,  except  a  stray  Free- 
manite  here  and  there,  recognised  the  advantage 
of  having  so  distinguished  a  personage  in  so 
conspicuous  a  Chair.  Even  in  a  Professor  other 
qualities  are  required  besides  erudition.  Stubbs's 
Constitutional  History  of  England  may  be  a  useful 
book  for  students.  Unless  or  until  it  is  rewritten, 
it  can  have  no  existence  for  the  general  reader; 
and  if  the  test  of  impartiality  be  applied,  Stubbs 
is  as  much  for  the  Church  against  the  State  as 
Froude  is  for  the  State  against  the  Church.  When 
Mr.  Goldwin  Smith  resigned  the  Professorship 
of  Modern  History,  or  contemplated  resigning  it, 
Stubbs  wrote  to  Freeman,  "  It  would  be  painful 
to  have  Froude,  and  worse  still  to  have  anybody 
else."  He  received  the  appointment  himself, 
and  held  it  for  eighteen  years,  when  he  gave 
way  to  Freeman,  and  more  than  a  quarter  of  a 
century  elapsed  before  the  painful  event  occurred. 
By  that  time  Stubbs  was  Bishop  of  Oxford, 
translated  from  Chester,  and  had  shown  what 
a  fatal  combination  for  a  modern  prelate  is 
learning  with  humour.  If  Froude  had  been 
appointed  twenty  years  earlier,  on  the  completion 
of  his  twelve  volumes,  he  might  have  made 
Oxford  the  great  historical  school  of  England. 
But  it  was  too  late.  The  aftermath  was  wonderful, 
and  the  lectures  he  delivered  at  Oxford  show 


THE    OXFORD    PROFESSORSHIP     389 

him  at  his  best.     But  the  effort  was  too  much 
for  him,  and  hastened  his  end. 

It  must  not  be  supposed  that  Froude  felt 
only  the  burden.  His  powers  of  enjoyment 
were  great,  and  he  thoroughly  enjoyed  Oxford. 
He  had  left  it  forty  years  ago  under  a  cloud. 
He  came  back  in  a  dignified  character  with  an 
assured  position.  He  liked  the  familiar  buildings 
and  the  society  of  scholars.  The  young  men 
interested  and  amused  him.  Ironical  as  he 
might  be  at  times,  and  pessimistic,  his  talk  was 
intellectually  stimulating.  His  strong  convic- 
tions, even  his  inveterate  prejudices,  prevented 
his  irony  from  degenerating  into  cynicism. 
History,  said  Carlyle,  is  the  quintessence  of  in- 
numerable biographies,  and  it  was  always  the 
human  side  of  history  that  appealed  to  Froude. 
He  once  playfully  compared  himself  with  the 
Mephistopheles  of  Faust,  sitting  in  the  Professor's 
chair.  But  in  truth  he  saw  always  behind 
historical  events  the  directing  providence  of  God. 
Newman  held  that  no  belief  could  stand  against 
the  destructive  force  of  the  human  reason,  the 
intellectus  sibi  permissus.  Froude  felt  that  there 
were  things  which  reason  could  not  explain,  and 
that  no  revelation  was  needed  to  trace  the  limits 
of  knowledge.  Sceptical  as  he  was  in  many 
ways,  he  had  the  belief  which  is  fundamental, 
which  no  scientific  discovery  or  philosophic  specu- 
lation can  shake  or  move.  Creeds  and  Churches 
might  come  or  go.  The  moral  law  remained 


390  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

where  it  was.  His  own  creed  is  expressed 
in  that  which  he  attributes  to  Luther.  "  The 
faith  which  Luther  himself  would  have  described 
as  the  faith  that  saved  is  the  faith  that  beyond 
all  things  and  always  truth  is  the  most  precious 
of  possessions,  and  truthfulness  the  most  precious 
of  qualities ;  that  when  truth  calls,  whatever 
the  consequence,  a  brave  man  is  bound  to  follow." 

Although  Froude  was  probably  happier  at  Oxford 
than  he  had  been  at  any  time  since  1874,  the  regu- 
lations of  his  professorship  worried  him,  as  they 
had  worried  Stubbs  and  Freeman.  They  seemed 
to  have  been  drawn  on  the  assumption  that  a 
Professor  would  evade  his  duties,  and  behave 
like  an  idle  undergraduate.  Froude,  on  the  con- 
trary, interpreted  them  in  the  sense  most  adverse 
to  himself.  The  authorities  of  the  place,  or  some 
of  them,  would  have  had  him  spare  his  pains,  and 
colourably  evade  the  statute  by  talking  instead 
of  lecturing.  But  Froude  was  too  conscientious 
to  seek  relief  in  this  way.  Whatever  he  had  to 
do  he  did  thoroughly,  conscientiously,  and  as  well 
as  he  could.  There  is  no  trace  of  senility  in  his 
professorial  utterances.  On  the  contrary,  they 
are  full  of  life  and  fire.  Yet  Froude  was  by  no 
means  entirely  engrossed  in  his  work.  He  had 
time  for  hospitality,  and  for  making  friends  with 
young  men.  He  loved  his  familiar  surroundings, 
for  nothing  can  vulgarise  Oxford.  He  found 
men  who  still  read  the  classics  as  literature, 

1  Short  Studies,  iii.  189. 


THE    OXFORD    PROFESSORSHIP     391 

not  to  convict  Aeschylus  of  violating  Dawes's 
Canon,  or  to  get  loafers  through  the  schools. 
He  was  not  in  all  respects,  it  must  be  admitted, 
abreast  of  modern  thought.  His  education  had 
been  unscientific,  and  he  cared  no  more  for  Darwin 
than  Carlyle  did.  He  had  learnt  from  his  brother 
William,  who  died  in  1879,*  the  scope  and  tendency 
of  modern  experiments,  and  astronomical  illus- 
trations are  not  uncommon  in  his  writings.  But 
the  bent  of  his  mind  was  in  other  directions,  and 
he  had  never  been  under  the  influence  of  Spencer 
or  of  Mill.  The  Oxford  which  he  left  in  1849  was 
dominated  by  Aristotle  and  Bishop  Butler.  He 
came  back  to  find  Butler  dethroned,  and  more 
modern  philosophers  established  in  his  place. 
Aristotle  remained  where  he  was,  not  the  type  and 
symbol  of  universal  knowledge,  as  Dante  conceived 
him,  but  the  groundwork  upon  which  all  later 
systems  had  been  built.  Plato,  without  whom 
there  would  have  been  no  Aristotle,  was  more 

'•'  My  brother,"  Froude  wrote  to  Lady  Derby,  "  though  his 
name  was  little  before  the  public,  was  well  known  to  the  Admiralty 
and  indeed  in  every  dock-yard  in  Europe.  He  has  contributed 
more  than  any  man  of  his  time  to  the  scientific  understanding 
of  ships  and  ship-building.  His  inner  life  was  still  more  remark- 
able. He  resisted  the  influence  of  Newman  when  all  the  rest  of 
his  family  gave  way,  refusing  to  become  a  Catholic  when  they 
went  over,  and  keeping  steadily  to  his  own  honest  convictions. 
To  me  he  was  ever  the  most  affectionate  of  friends.  The  earliest 
recollections  of  my  life  are  bound  up  with  him,- and  his  death 
takes  away  a  large  part  of  the  little  interest  which  remained  to 
me  in  this  most  uninteresting  world.  The  loss  to  the  Admiralty 
for  the  special  work  in  which  he  was  engaged  will  be  almost 
irreparable." 


392  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

closely  and  reverently  studied  than  ever,  partly 

no  doubt  through  Jowett,  and  yet  mainly  because 

no  philosopher  can  ever  get  far  away  from  him. 

Jowett  himself,  the  ideal  "  Head  of  a  House," 

who  had  been  at  Balliol  when  Froude  was  at  Oriel, 

died  in  the  second  year  of  Froude' s  professorship, 

after  seeing  many  of  his  pupils  famous  in  the  world. 

He  had  lived  through  the  great  period  of  transition 

in  which  Oxford  passed  from  a  monastery  to  a 

microcosm.     The  Act   of   1854  nad  opened  the 

University  to  Dissenters,  reserving  fellowships  and 

scholarships,  all  places  of  honour  and  emolument, 

for  members  of  the  Established  Church.     The  Act 

of  1871  removed  the  test  of  churchmanship  for  all 

such  places,  and  for  the  higher  degrees,  except 

theological  professorships  and  degrees  in  divinity. 

The  Act  of   1877  opened  the  Headships  of  the 

Colleges,  and  put  an  end  to  prize  Fellowships  for 

life.     The  Provost  of  Oriel,  then  Vice-Chancellor, 

was   a  layman.     Marriage   did  not  terminate   a 

Fellowship,  which,  unless  it  were  connected  with 

academic  work,  lasted  for  seven  years,  and  no 

longer.     The  old  collegiate  existence  was  at  an 

end.     Many  of  the  tutors  were  married,  and  lived 

in  their  own  houses.     When  Gladstone  revisited 

Oxford  in  1890,  and  occupied  rooms  in  college  as 

an  Honorary  Fellow  of  All  Souls,  nothing  pleased 

him  less  than  the  number  of  women  he  encountered 

at  every  turn.     They  were  not  all  the  wives  and 

daughters  of  the  dons,  who  in  Gladstone's  view 

had  no  more  right  to  such  appendages  than  priests 


THE    OXFORD    PROFESSORSHIP     393 

of  the  Roman  Church;  there  were  also  the 
students  at  the  Ladies'  Colleges,  who  were  allowed 
to  compete  for  honours,  though  not  to  receive 
degrees. 

Froude,  who  brought  his  own  daughters  with 
him,  entered  easily  into  the  changed  conditions. 
He  was  not  given  to  lamentation  over  the  past, 
and  if  he  regretted  anything  it  was  the  want 
of  Puritan  earnestness,  of  serious  purpose  in 
life.  He  had  an  instinctive  sympathy  with  men 
of  action,  whether  they  were  soldiers,  sailors,  or 
statesmen.  For  mere  talkers  he  had  no  respect 
at  all,  and  he  was  under  the  mistaken  impression 
that  they  governed  the  country  through  the  House 
of  Commons.  He  never  realised,  any  more  than 
Carlyle,  the  vast  amount  of  practical  administra- 
tive work  which  such  a  man  as  Gladstone  achieved, 
or  on  the  other  hand  the  immense  weight  carried 
in  Parliament  by  practical  ability  and  experience, 
as  distinguished  from  brilliancy  and  rhetoric. 
The  history  which  he  liked,  and  to  which  he 
confined  himself,  was  antecedent  to  the  triumph 
of  Parliament  over  the  Crown.  Warren  Hastings, 
he  used  to  say,  conquered  India ;  Burke  would 
have  hanged  him  for  doing  it.  The  House  of 
Lords  acquitted  Hastings ;  and  so  far  from  criti- 
cising the  doubtful  policy  of  the  war  with  France 
in  1793,  Burke's  only  complaint  of  Pitt  was  that 
he  did  not  carry  it  on  with  sufficient  vigour.  The 
distinction  between  talkers  and  doers  is  really 
fallacious.  Some  speeches  are  actions.  Some 


394  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

actions  are  too  trivial  to  deserve  the  name.  But 
if  Froude  was  incapable  of  understanding  Parlia- 
mentary government,  he  very  seldom  attempted 
to  deal  with  it.  The  English  in  Ireland  is  a  rare, 
and  not  a  fortunate,  exception.  The  House  of 
Tudor  was  far  more  congenial  to  him  than  either 
the  House  of  Stuart  or  the  House  of  Brunswick. 
Froude  delivered  his  Inaugural  Lecture  on  the 
27th  of  October,  1892.  The  place  was  the  Museum, 
which  stands  in  the  parks  opposite  Keble,  and  the 
attendance  was  very  large.  In  the  history  of 
Oxford  there  have  been  few  more  remarkable 
occasions.  Although  the  new  Professor  had  made 
his  name  and  writings  familiar  to  the  whole  of  the 
educated  world,  his  immediate  predecessor  had 
vehemently  denied  his  right  to  the  name  of 
historian,  and  had  assured  the  public  with  all  the 
emphasis  which  reiteration  can  give  that  Froude 
could  not  distinguish  falsehood  from  truth.  If 
anything  could  have  brought  Freeman  out  of  his 
grave,  it  would  have  been  Froude' s  appointment 
to  succeed  him.  It  is  the  custom  in  an  Inaugural 
Lecture  to  mention  in  eulogistic  language  the 
late  occupant  of  the  chair.  No  man  was  less 
inclined  to  bear  malice  than  Froude.  His  dis- 
position was  placable,  and  his  temperament  calm. 
Freeman  had  grossly  and  frequently  insulted  him 
without  the  faintest  provocation.  But  he  had 
long  since  taken  his  revenge,  such  as  it  was,  and 
he  could  afford  to  be  generous  now.  He  dis- 
covered, with  some  ingenuity,  a  point  of  agreement 


THE    OXFORD    PROFESSORSHIP     395 

in  that  Freeman,  like  himself,  was  a  champion 
of  classical  education.  Therefore,  "  along  with  his 
asperities,"  he  had  "  strong  masculine  sense," 
and  had  voted  for  compulsory  Greek.  If  the  right 
of  suffrage  were  restricted  to  men  who  knew 
Greek  as  well  as  Froude  or  Freeman,  the  decisions 
of  Congregation  at  Oxford,  and  of  the  Senate  at 
Cambridge,  would  command  more  respect. 

Froude  must  have  been  reminded  by  the  obliga- 
tory reference  to  Freeman  that  a  man  of  seventy- 
four  was  succeeding  a  man  of  sixty-nine.  The 
Roman  Cardinals  were,  he  said,  in  the  habit  of 
electing  an  aged  Pontiff  with  the  hope,  not  always 
fulfilled,  that  he  would  die  soon.  He  had  no  belief 
that  such  an  expectation  would  be  falsified  in  his 
own  case,  and  he  undertook,  with  obvious  sincerity, 
not  to  hold  the  post  for  a  single  day  after  he  had 
ceased  to  be  capable  of  efficiently  discharging 
his  functions.  To  history  his  own  life  had  been 
devoted,  and  it  would  indeed  have  been  strange 
if  he  could  not  give  young  men  some  help  in 
reading  it.  His  own  great  book  might  not  be 
officially  recommended  for  the  schools.  It  was 
unofficially  recommended  by  all  lovers  of  good 
literature  and  sound  learning.  Like  most  people 
who  know  the  meaning  of  science  and  of  history, 
he  denied  that  history  was  a  science.  There  were 
no  fixed  and  ascertained  principles  by  which 
the  actions  of  men  were  determined.  There  was 
no  possibility  of  trying  experiments.  The  late 
Mr.  Buckle  had  not  displaced  the  methods  of  the 


396  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

older  historians,  nor  founded  a  system  of  his 
own.  "  I  have  no  philosophy  of  history,"  added 
Froude,  who  disbelieved  in  the  universal  appli- 
cability of  general  truths.  Here,  perhaps,  he  is 
hardly  just  to  himself.  The  introductory  chapter 
to  his  History  of  the  Reformation,  especially  the 
impressive  contrast  between  modern  and  mediaeval 
England,  is  essentially  philosophical,  so  much  so 
that  one  sees  in  it  the  student  of  Thucydides, 
Tacitus,  and  Gibbon.  History  to  Froude,  like  the 
world  to  Jaques,  was  a  stage,  and  all  the  men  and 
women  merely  players.  But  a  lover  of  Goethe 
knows  well  enough  that  the  drama  can  be  philo- 
sophical, and  Shakespeare,  the  master  of  human 
nature,  has  drawn  nothing  more  impressive  than  the 
close  of  Wolsey's  career.  "  The  history  of  mankind 
is  the  history  of  great  men,"  was  Carlyle's  motto, 
and  Froude's.  It  is  a  noble  one,  and  to  discredit 
great  men  with  low  motives  is  the  vice  of  ignoble 
minds.  The  reign  of  Henry  VIII.,  after  Wolsey's 
fall,  was  rich  in  horrors  and  in  tragical  catas- 
trophes. But  it  was  not  a  mere  carnival  of  lust 
and  blood.  High  principles  were  at  stake,  and 
profound  issues  divided  parties,  beside  which  the 
levity  of  Anne  Boleyn  and  the  eyes  of  Jane 
Seymour  were  not  worth  a  moment's  thought. 
Hobbes  wondered  that  a  Parliament  man  worth 
thousands  of  pounds,  like  Hampden,  should  scruple 
to  pay  twenty  shillings  for  ship-money,  as  if  the 
amount  had  anything  to  do  with  the  principle 
that  taxes  could  only  be  levied  by  the  House  of 


THE    OXFORD    PROFESSORSHIP     397 

Commons.  Henry's  vices  are  dust  in  the  balance 
against  the  fact  that  he  stood  for  England  against 
Rome.  It  is  one  of  Froude's  chief  merits  that  he 
never  fails  to  see  the  wood  for  the  trees,  never 
forgets  general  propositions  to  lose  himself  in  de- 
tails. A  novice  whose  own  mind  is  a  blank  may 
read  whole  chapters  of  Gardiner  without  dis- 
covering that  any  events  of  much  significance 
happened  in  the  seventeenth  century.  He  will 
not  read  many  pages  of  Froude  before  he  perceives 
that  the  sixteenth  century  established  our  national 
independence. 

Two  of  Froude's  pet  hobbies  may  be  found  in 
his  Inaugural  Lecture.  There  is  the  theory  that 
judgment  falls  upon  idleness  and  vice,  which  he 
adopted  from  Carlyle.  There  is  his  own  doctrine 
that  the  Statute  Book  furnishes  the  most  authentic 
material  of  history.  It  is  no  answer  to  say  that 
preambles  are  inserted  by  Ministers,  who  put 
their  own  case  and  not  the  case  of  the  nation. 
In  the  use  or  reception  of  all  evidence  allowance 
must  be  made  for  the  source  from  which  it  comes. 
But  even  Governments  do  not  invent  out  of  their 
own  heads,  or  put  into  statutes  what  is  foreign  to 
the  public  mind.  They  employ  the  arguments 
most  likely  to  prevail,  and  these  must  be  closely 
connected  with  the  circumstances  of  the  day.  No 
recital  in  an  Act  of  Parliament  can  prove  incon- 
testably  that  the  monasteries  were  stews,  or  worse. 
That  such  a  thing  could  be  plausibly  alleged,  and 
generally  believed,  is  itself  important,  and  history 


398  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

must  take  account  of  popular  views.  Debates 
were  not  reported  in  the  sixteenth  century,  nor 
was  freedom  of  speech  in  Parliament  recognised 
by  the  Crown.  There  was  nothing  to  ensure  a 
fair  trial  for  the  victims  of  a  royal  prosecution, 
and  testimony  obtained  by  torture  was  accepted 
as  authentic.  All  these  are  facts,  and  to  neglect 
them  is  to  go  astray.  But  they  do  not  prove  that 
every  public  document  is  untrustworthy  ;  or  that 
the  words  of  a  statute  have  no  more  to  do  with 
reality  than  the  words  of  a  romance.  It  is  a 
question  of  degree.  Historical  narrative  could 
not  be  written  under  the  conditions  most  properly 
imposed  upon  criminal  proceedings  in  a  court  of 
law.  If  nothing  which  cannot  be  proved  beyond 
the  possibility  of  reasonable  doubt  is  admitted 
into  the  pages  of  history,  they  will  be  bare  indeed. 
It  is  significant  that  Froude  laid  down  in  1892 
the  same  propositions  for  which  he  had  contended 
in  the  Oxford  Essays  of  1855.  He  had  suffered 
many  things  in  the  meantime  of  The  Saturday 
Review,  but  he  held  to  his  old  opinions  with  un- 
shaken tenacity.  All  Froude' s  changes  were  made 
early  in  life.  When  once  he  had  shaken  himself 
free  of  Tractarianism,  The  Nemesis  of  Faith,  and 
Elective  Affinities,  he  remained  a  Protestant, 
Puritan,  sea-loving,  priest-hating  Englishman. 

The  subject  with  which  Froude  began  his  brief 
career  as  Professor  was  the  Council  of  Trent. 
The  Council  of  Trent  has  been  described  by  one 
of  the  great  historians  of  the  world,  Fra  Paolo 


THE    OXFORD    PROFESSORSHIP     399 

Sarpi,   whom   Macaulay   considered   second  only 
to  Thucydides.     Entirely  ineffective  for  the  pur- 
pose of  securing  universal  concord,  it  did  in  reality 
separate  Protestant  from  Catholic  Europe,  and 
establish   Papal   authority   over   the   Church    of 
Rome.     When  the  Council  met,  the  Papacy  was 
no  part  of  orthodox  Catholicism,  and  Henry  VIII. 
never  dreamt  that  in  repudiating  the  jurisdiction 
of  the  Pope  he  severed  himself  from  the  Catholic 
Church.     If  Luther  had  been  only  a  heretic,  the 
Council  might  have  put  him  down.     But  he  had 
behind  him  the  bulk  of  the  laity,  and  Cardinal 
Contarini  told  Paul  III.  that  the  revolt  against 
ecclesiastical  power  would  continue  if  every  priest 
submitted.     "  The  Reformation,"  said  Froude  at 
the  beginning  of  his  first  course,  in  November, 
1892,  "  is  the  hinge  on  which  all  modern  history 
turns."      He  traced  in  it  the  rise  of  England's 
greatness.     When  he   came  back  in   his  old  age 
to  Oxford,  it  was  to  sound  the  trumpet-note  of 
private  judgment  and  religious  liberty,  as  if  the 
Oxford  Movement  and  the  Anglo-Catholic  revival 
had  never  been.     Froude  could  not   be   indiffer- 
ent to  the  moral  side  of  historical  questions,   or 
accept  the   doctrine  that  every  one  is  right  from 
his  own    point  of  view.      The   Reformation  did 
in  his  eyes  determine  that  men  were  responsible 
to  God  alone,  and  not   to  priests  or    Churches, 
for    their    opinions    and   their    deeds.       It    also 
decided  that    the    Church  must   be   subordinate 
to  the  State,  not  the  State  to  the  Church.     This 


400  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

is  called  Erastianism,  and  is  the  bugbear  of  High 
Churchmen.  But  there  is  no  escape  from  the 
alternative,  and  the  Church  of  Rome  has  never 
abandoned  her  claim  to  universal  authority. 
Against  it  Henry  VIII.  and  Cromwell,  Elizabeth 
and  Cecil,  set  up  the  supremacy  of  the  law,  made 
and  administered  by  laymen.  As  Froude  said 
at  the  close  of  his  first  course,  in  the  Hilary  Term 
of  1893,  "  the  principles  on  which  the  laity  in- 
sisted have  become  the  rule  of  the  modern  world. 
Popes  no  longer  depose  Princes,  dispense  with 
oaths,  or  absolve  subjects  from  their  allegiance. 
Appeals  are  not  any  more  carried  to  Rome  from 
the  national  tribunals,  nor  justice  sold  there  to 
the  highest  bidder."  Justice  was  sold  at  Rome 
before  the  existence  of  the  Catholic  Church,  or 
even  the  Christian  religion.  It  has  been  sold, 
as  Hugh  Latimer  testified,  in  England  herself. 
But  with  the  English  Court's  independence  of 
the  Holy  See  came  the  principles  of  civil  and 
religious  freedom. 

Few  things  annoyed  Froude  more  than  the 
attacks  of  Macaulay  and  other  Liberals  upon 
Cranmer.  This  was  not  merely  sentimental  attach- 
ment on  Froude' s  part  to  the  compiler  of  the 
Prayer  Book.  He  looked  on  the  Marian  Martyrs 
as  the  precursors  of  the  Long  Parliament  and  of 
the  Revolution,  the  champions  of  liberty  in  Church 
and  State.  He  would  have  felt  that  he  was  doing 
less  than  his  duty  if  he  had  taught  his  pupils  mere 
facts.  Those  facts  had  a  lesson,  for  them  as  well 


THE   OXFORD    PROFESSORSHIP     401 

as  for  him,  and  his  sense  of  what  the  lesson  was 
had  deepened  with  years.  He  had  observed  in  his 
own  day  an  event  which  made  much  the  same  im- 
pression upon  him  as  study  of  the  French  Revolu- 
tion had  made  upon  Carlyle.  When  the  Second 
Empire  perished  at  Sedan,  Froude  saw  in  the 
catastrophe  the  judgment  of  Providence  upon  a 
sinister  and  tortuous  career.  If  the  duty  of  an 
historian  be  to  exclude  moral  considerations, 
Froude  did  not  fulfil  it.  That  there  were  good 
men  on  the  wrong  side  he  perceived  plainly  enough. 
But  that  did  not  make  it  the  right  side,  nor  confuse 
the  difference  between  the  two. 

Froude 's  second  set  of  Oxford  lectures,  begun 
in  the  Easter  Term  of  1893,  was  entitled  English 
Seamen  of  the  Sixteenth  Century,  and  the  name 
of  the  first  lecture  in  it,  a  thoroughly  characteristic 
name,  was  The  Sea  Cradle  of  the  Reformation.  He 
was  in  his  element,  and  his  success  was  complete. 
How  Protestant  England  ousted  Catholic  Spain 
from  the  command  of  the  ocean,  and  made  it 
Britannia's  realm,  was  a  story  which  he  loved 
to  tell.  "  The  young  King,"  Henry  VIII.,  "  like 
a  wise  man,  turned  his  first  attention  to  the  broad 
ditch,  as  he  called  the  British  Channel,  which 
formed  the  natural  defence  of  the  kingdom." 
It  was  "  the  secret  determined  policy  of  Spain 
to  destroy  the  English  fleet,  pilots,  masters,  and 
sailors,  by  means  of  the  Inquisition."  In  1562, 
according  to  Cecil,  more  than  twenty  British 
subjects  had  been  burnt  at  the  stake  in  Spain 

(2310)  26 


402  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

for  heresy,  and  more  than  two  hundred  were 
starving  in  Spanish  prisons.  There  was  work 
for  Hawkins  and  Drake.  They  were  both  Devon- 
shire men,  like  Raleigh. 

'Twas  ever  the  way  with  good  Queen  Bess, 

Who  ruled  as  well  as  a  mortal  can, 
When  she  was  stogged,  and  the  country  in  a  mess, 

To  send  for  a  Devonshire  man. 

Spain    paid    heavily    for    the    persecution    of 
British  sailors.     In  his  fifth  lecture,  Parties  in 
the  State,  Froude  read  with  dramatic  emphasis, 
and  in  a  singularly  impressive  manner,  the  applica- 
tion of  a  seaman  to  Elizabeth  for  leave  to  attack 
Philip's  men-of-war  off  the  banks  of  Newfoundland. 
"  Give  me  five  vessels,  and  I  will  go  out  and  sink 
them   all,   and   the   galleons   shall   rot   in   Cadiz 
Harbour  for  want  of  hands  to  sail  them.     But 
decide,  Madam,  and  decide  quickly.     Time  flies, 
and  will  not  return.     The  wings  of  man's  life  are 
plumed  with  the  feathers  of  death"    When  he  uttered 
these  tragic  words,   Froude  paused,  and  looked 
up,  and  it  seemed  to  those  who  heard  him  as  if 
he  felt  that  the  time  of  his  own  departure  was 
at    hand.     Elizabeth    herself    was  never  moved 
by    sentiment,    and    final   vengeance    on   Spain 
had  to  wait  for  the  Armada,  with  which  these 
lectures,  like    the  History,   conclude.     The    con- 
sequences he  left  to  others  who  had  more  years 
before  them  than  he  himself.     He  loved  to  dwell 
on  the  glories  of  seamen,  especially  Devonshire 
seamen,  whose   descendants  he  had  known  from 


THE   OXFORD    PROFESSORSHIP     403 

his  boyhood.  The  open  sea  and  the  open  air, 
the  stars  and  the  waves,  were  akin  to  him. 
His  companions  sometimes  thought  that  he 
cared  too  little  for  the  perils  of  the  deep.  A 
lady  who  went  boating  with  him,  and  hazarded 
the  opinion  that  they  would  be  drowned,  got 
no  warmer  comfort  than  "  Very  likely,"  which 
struck  her  as  grim.  Probably  he  knew  that  there 
was  no  danger.  He  was  accustomed  to  storms, 
and  rather  enjoyed  them  than  otherwise.  His 
lectures  op  the  Elizabethan  heroes  of  the  sea 
had  a  fascination  for  young  Englishmen  which 
no  historical  discourses  ever  surpassed. 

These  sea-tales  were  spread  over  a  year,  being 
delivered  in  the  Easter  Terms  of  1893  and  1894. 
Before  they  were  finished  Froude  had  begun 
another  course  on  the  life  and  correspondence  of 
Erasmus.  Erasmus  is  one  of  the  choicest  names 
in  the  history  of  letters,  the  flower  of  the  religious 
Renaissance.  Simply  and  sincerely  pious,  he 
enjoyed  without  abusing  all  the  pleasures  of  life, 
wrote  such  Latin  prose  as  had  not  been  known 
since  Pliny,  and  learnt  Greek  that  he  might  under- 
stand the  true  meaning  of  the  New  Testament. 
Hating  the  monks  of  his  own  time  for  their  igno- 
rance and  coarseness,  he  was  as  learned  as  any 
Benedictine  of  old,  and  as  a  master  of  irony  he 
is  like  a  gentler  Pascal,  a  more  reverent  Voltaire. 
He  loved  England,  the  England  of  Archbishop 
Warham,  Dean  Colet,  and  Sir  Thomas  More. 
English  ladies  too  were  much  to  his  taste,  and  in 


404  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

his  familiar  letters  he  has  described  their  charms 
with  frank  appreciation.  Priest  as  he  was,  and 
strictly  moral,  he  cultivated  an  innocent  epicurean- 
ism, including  the  collection  of  manuscripts  and 
the  exposure  of  pretentious  ignorance  in  high 
places.  He  felt  imperfect  sympathy  with  Luther, 
and  his  literary  criticism  would  have  made  no 
reformation.  He  was  indeed  precisely  what  we 
now  call  a  Broad  Churchman,  accepting  forms 
as  convenient,  though  not  essential,  to  faith.  No 
one  was  better  qualified  to  interpret  him  than 
Froude,  whose  translations  of  his  letters,  though 
free  and  sometimes  loose,  are  vivid,  racy,  and 
idiomatic.  Froude  was  by  no  means  a  blind 
admirer  of  Erasmus.  His  favourite  heroes  were 
men  of  action,  and  he  regarded  Luther  as  the 
real  champion  of  spiritual  freedom.  Intellect, 
he  used  to  say,  fought  no  battles,  and  was  no  match 
for  superstition.  Without  Luther  there  would 
have  been  no  Reformation.  There  might  well 
have  been  a  Reformation  without  Erasmus. 

Neither  of  them  was  necessary  according  to 
Contarini,  and  in  truth  the  Reformation  had  many 
sides.  When  Selden  attended  the  Westminster 
Assembly  of  Divines,  he  took  occasion  to  remind 
his  colleagues  that  the  Scriptures  were  not  written 
in  English.  "  Perhaps  in  your  little  pocket 
Bibles  with  gilt  leaves  "  (which  they  would  often 
pull  out  and  read)  "  the  translation  may  be  thus, 
but  the  Greek  or  the  Hebrew  signifies  thus  and 
thus."  So  he  would  speak,  says  Whitelock,  and 


THE   OXFORD    PROFESSORSHIP     405 

totally  silence  them.  But  neither  were  the 
Scriptures  written  in  Latin.  It  was  Erasmus 
who  revived  the  study  of  the  Greek  Testament, 
the  charter  of  the  scholar's  reformation.  He  gave 
the  Renaissance,  in  its  origin  purely  Pagan,  a 
Christian  direction,  and  prevented  the  divorce  of 
learning  from  religion.  He  also  protested  against 
the  confusion  of  Christianity  with  asceticism,  and 
against  belief  in  the  superior  sanctity  of  monks. 
He  turned  his  satire  upon  corruption  in  high  places, 
and  did  not  spare  the  Holy  See.  His  residence  in 
England,  his  friendship  with  More,  his  admiration  for 
the  earlier  and  better  part  of  Henry  VIII.'s  career, 
connected  him  with  events  of  which  Froude  had 
himself  traced  the  development .  Luther  moved  him 
sometimes  to  sarcasm.  Toleration  and  comprehen- 
sion were  the  watchwords  of  Erasmus.  "  Reduce 
the  dogmas  necessary  to  be  believed,  "  he  said,  "  to 
the  smallest  possible  number ;  you  can  do  it  without 
danger  to  the  realities  of  Christianity.  On  other 
points,  either  discourage  inquiry,  or  leave  every  one 
to  believe  what  he  pleases — then  we  shall  have 
no  more  quarrels,  and  religion  will  again  take 
hold  of  life."  The  subject  was  not  a  new  one  to 
Froude.  He  had  lectured  on  Erasmus  and  Luther 
at  Newcastle  five-and-twenty  years  before.  The 
contrast  between  the  two  reformers  is  perennially 
interesting.  Goethe,  a  supreme  critic,  thought 
that  reform  of  the  Church  should  have  been  left 
to  Erasmus,  and  that  Luther  was  a  misfortune. 
But  then  Goethe,  though  he  understood  religious 


406  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

enthusiasm,  did  not  see  the  need  for  it,  and  would 
have  tolerated  such  a  Pope  as  Leo  X.,  who  had 
excellent  taste  in  literature,  rather  than  see  issues 
submitted  to  the  people  which  should  be  left 
for  the  learned  to  decide. 

The  weak  point  of  Froude 's  Erasmus  is  the 
inaccuracy  of  its  verbal  scholarship.     "  Sir,"  said 
Dr.  Johnson  of  a  loose  scholar,  "  he  makes  out  the 
Latin  from  the  meaning,  not  the  meaning  from 
the  Latin."     This  biting  sarcasm  would  be  inap- 
plicable to  Froude,  who  knew  the  dead  languages, 
as  they  are  called,  well  enough  to  read  them  with 
ease  and  enjoyment.     But  he  took  in  the  general 
sense  of  a  passage  so  quickly  that    he   did   not 
always,    even    in    translating,    stop   to    consider 
the  precise  significance  of  every  word.     Literal 
conformity  with  the   original  text  is   of  course 
not  possible  or  desirable  in  a  paraphrase.     What 
Froude    did    not    sufficiently    consider    was    the 
difference  between  the  translation  and  the  trans- 
lator  himself,   who   cannot   paraphrase   properly 
unless  he  renders  literally  in  his  own  mind.    Froude 
gave  abundant  proof  of  his  good  faith  by  quoting 
in  notes  some  of  the  very  passages  which  are 
incorrectly   rendered    above.    A   great   deal   has 
been  made  by  a  Catholic  critic  of  the  fact  that 
the    book     which     checked     Ignatius    Loyola's 
"  devotional  emotions  "  was  not  Erasmus's  Greek 
Testament,  but  his  Enchiridion  Militis  Christiani, 
Christian  Soldier's  Manual.     This  mistake  was  un- 
duly favourable  to  the  saint.    Froude  did  not  mean 


THE    OXFORD    PROFESSORSHIP     407 

to  imply  that  it  was  the  actual  words  of  Scripture 
which  had  this  effect  upon  Ignatius.  He  was 
referring  to  the  great  scholar's  own  notes,  which 
are  polemical,  and  not  intended  to  please  monks. 
The  founder  of  the  Jesuits  would  have  doubtless 
regarded  them  as  most  detestable  blasphemy.  The 
Enchiridion,  on  the  other  hand,  is  a  purely  devo- 
tional book,  though  written  for  a  man  of  the  world. 
'  My  object,"  says  Froude  in  his  Preface, 
"  has  been  rather  to  lead  historical  students  to 
a  study  of  Erasmus's  own  writings  than  to 
provide  an  abbreviated  substitute  for  them." 
The  students  who  took  the  advice  will  have 
found  that  Froude  was  guilty  of  some  strange 
inadvertences,  such  as  mistaking  through  a 
misprint  a  foster  brother  for  a  collection  of  the 
classics,  but  they  will  not  have  discovered  any- 
thing which  substantially  impairs  the  value  of 
his  work.  His  paraphrases  were  submitted  to 
two  competent  scholars,  who  drew  up  a  long 
and  rather  formidable  list  of  apparently  in- 
accurate renderings.  These  were  in  turn  sub- 
mitted to  the  accomplished  Latinist,  Mr.  Allen  of 
Corpus,  who  is  editing  the  Letters  of  Erasmus 
for  the  Clarendon  Press.  Mr.  Allen  thought 
that  in  several  cases  Froude  had  given  the  true 
meaning  better  than  a  more  literal  translation 
would  give  it.  There  remain  a  number  of  rather 
trivial  slips,  which  do  not  appreciably  diminish 
the  merit  of  the  best  attempt  ever  made  to  set 
Erasmus  before  English  readers  in  his  habit 


4o8  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

as  he  was.  The  Latin  of  Erasmus  is  not  always 
easy.  He  wrote  it  beautifully,  but  not  naturally, 
as  an  exercise  in  imitation  of  Cicero.  Without  a 
thorough  knowledge  of  Cicero  and  of  Terence  he  is 
sometimes  unintelligible,  in  a  few  cases  the  text 
of  his  letters  is  corrupt,  and  in  others  his  real 
meaning  is  doubtful.  One  of  the  most  glaring 
blunders,  "  idol "  for  "  old,"  is  obviously  due  to 
the  printer,  and  a  more  careful  comparison  with 
the  Latin  would  have  easily  removed  them  all. 
But  at  seventy-six  a  little  laxity  may  be  pardoned, 
and  these  were  the  only  Oxford  lectures  which 
Froude  himself  prepared  for  the  press.  The 
publication  of  English  Seamen  and  the  Council 
of  Trent  was  posthumous. 

Between  1867  and  1893  Froude  had  become 
more  favourable  to  Erasmus,  or  more  sympathetic 
with  his  point  of  view.  It  was  not  that  he  admired 
Luther  less.  On  the  contrary,  his  Protestant  con- 
victions grew  stronger  with  years,  and  to  the  last  he 
raised  his  voice  against  the  Anglo-Catholic  revival. 
But  he  seemed  to  feel  with  more  force  the  saying 
of  Erasmus  that  "  the  sum  of  religion  is  peace." 
He  translated  and  read  out  to  his  class  the  whole 
of  the  satiric  dialogue  held  at  the  gate  of  Paradise 
between  St.  Peter  and  Julius  II.,  in  which  the  wars 
of  that  Pontiff  are  ruthlessly  flagellated,  and  the 
wicked  old  man  threatens  to  take  the  celestial 
city  by  storm.  Erasmus,  averse  as  he  was  from 
violent  measures,  had  no  lack  of  courage,  and  in 
his  own  name  he  told  the  truth  about  the  most 


THE    OXFORD    PROFESSORSHIP     409 

dignified  ecclesiastics.  No  artifices  imposed  upon 
him,  and  he  acknowledged  no  master  but  Christ. 
He  translated  the  arch-sceptic  Lucian,  about 
whom  Froude  has  himself  written  a  delightful 
essay.  "  I  wish,"  said  Froude,  "  I  wish  more 
of  us  read  Lucian  now.  He  was  the  greatest 
man  by  far  outside  the  Christian  Church  in  the 
second  century."  Lucian  lived  in  an  age  when 
miracles  the  most  grotesque  were  supported  by 
witnesses  the  most  serious,  and  when,  as  he  said, 
the  one  safeguard  was  an  obstinate  incredulity, 
the  ineradicable  certainty  that  miracles  did  not 
happen.  Erasmus  enjoyed  Lucian  as  a  corrective 
of  monkish  superstition,  though  he  himself  was 
essentially  Christian.  A  Protestant  he  never 
became.  He  lived  and  died  in  communion  with 
Rome,  denounced  by  monks  as  a  heretic,  and 
by  Lutherans  as  a  time-server.  Paul  III.  would 
have  made  him  a  Cardinal  if  his  means  had 
sufficed  for  a  Prince  of  the  Church.  Standing 
between  the  two  extremes,  he  saw  better  than 
any  of  his  contemporaries  the  real  proportions 
of  things,  and  Froude' s  last  words  on  the  subject 
were  that  students  would  be  most  likely  to 
understand  the  Reformation  if  they  looked  at 
it  with  the  eyes  of  Erasmus.  Small  faults 
notwithstanding,  there  is  no  one  who  has  drawn 
a  more  vivid,  or  a  more  faithful,  portrait  of 
Erasmus  than  Anthony  Froude. 

Of  Froude  in  his  Oxford  Chair   it  may  fairly 
be  said  that  in  a  short  time  he  fulfilled  a  long  time, 


4io  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

and  made  more  impression  upon  the  under- 
graduates in  a  few  months  than  Stubbs  had  made 
in  as  many  years.  It  was  not  so  much  the  love 
of  learning  that  he  inspired,  though  the  range 
of  his  studies  was  wide,  as  enthusiasm  for  English 
history  because  it  was  the  history  of  England. 
His  subjects  were  really  English.  Erasmus  knew 
England  thoroughly,  and  would  have  been  an 
Englishman  if  he  could.  The  Council  of  Trent 
failed  to  check  the  Reformation,  and  England 
without  the  Reformation  would  have  been  a 
different  country,  if  not  a  province  of  Spain. 
Froude's  lectures  were  events,  landmarks  in  the 
intellectual  life  of  Oxford,  and  the  young  men 
who  came  to  him  for  advice  went  away  not  merely 
with  dry  facts,  but  with  fructifying  ideas.  Dis- 
tasteful as  modern  Parliamentary  politics  were 
to  him,  the  position  of  the  British  Empire  in  the 
world  was  the  dominant  fact  in  his  mind,  and  he 
regarded  Oxford  as  a  training-ground  of  imperial 
statesmanship.  He  was  not  made  to  run  in 
harness,  or  to  act  as  a  coach  for  the  schools.  '  The 
teaching  business  at  Oxford,"  he  wrote  to  Skelton, 
after  his  last  term,  "  goes  at  high  pressure — in 
itself  utterly  absurd,  and  unsuited  altogether  to 
an  old  stager  like  myself.  The  undergraduates 
come  about  me  in  large  numbers,  and  I  have 
asserted  in  some  sense  my  own  freedom  ;  but 
one  cannot  escape  the  tyranny  of  the  system." 
This  is  severe,  though  not  perhaps  severer  than 

Table  Talk  of  Shirley,  p.  222, 


THE   OXFORD    PROFESSORSHIP     411 

the  Inaugural  Lecture   of  Professor   Firth.      To 
a  critic   from  the  outside  it   seems  that  Boards 
of    Studies    should    have    power   to   relax    their 
own  rules,  and  that   the  utmost  possible  relaxa- 
tion   should  have  been    granted  in  the  case  of 
Froude.     A    famous    historian    of    seventy-four, 
if  qualified  to  be   a  Professor  at   all,   must   be 
capable    of    managing    his    own    work    so    that 
it    may    be    most    useful    and    efficient.      The 
restrictions   of    which   Froude,   not    alone,   com- 
plained are  really  imcompatible  with  Regius  Pro- 
fessorships, or  at  least  with  the  patronage  of  the 
Crown.     They   imply  that   the   teaching   branch 
of  the  University  is  to  be  entirely  controlled  by 
expert   specialists  on  the  spot.     A   Regius  Pro- 
fessor is  a  national  institution,  a  public  man,  not 
like  a  college  tutor,  who  has  purely  local  functions 
to  discharge.     That  is  a  point  on  which  Freeman 
would    have    agreed    with    Froude,    and   Stubbs 
would  have  agreed  with  both  of  them.     Froude's 
success  in  spite  of  limitations  does  not  show  that 
they  were  wise,  but  that  genius  surmounts  ob- 
stacles   and   breaks  the  barriers  which  seek  to 
impede  it.      'To  my  sorrow  I  am  popular,"  he 
said,  "  and  my  room  is  crowded.     I  know  not  who 
they  are,  and  have  no  means  of  knowing.     So  it 
is  not  satisfactory.     I  must  alter  things  somehow. 
I  can't  yet  tell  how."     The  opportunity  never 
came.     But  he  was  too  old  and  too  wise  a  man 
to  let  such  things  affect  his  happiness,  and  he 
was  happier  in  Oxford  than  in  London.     "  Some 


412  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

of  the  old  Dons/'  he  wrote,  "  have  been  rather 
touchingly  kind." 

There  was  indeed  only  one  chance  of  escaping 
Froude's  magnetism,  and  that  was  to  keep  out  of 
his  way.  The  charm  of  his  company  was  always 
irresistible.  Different  as  the  Oxford  of  1893 
was  from  the  Oxford  of  1843,  young  men  are 
always  the  same,  and  Froude  thoroughly  under- 
stood them.  He  had  enjoyed  himself  at  Oriel, 
not  as  a  reading  recluse,  but  as  a  boy  out  of  school, 
and  he  was  as  young  in  heart  as  ever.  Strange 
is  the  hold  that  Oxford  lays  upon  men,  and  not 
less  strong  than  strange.  Nothing  weakens  it ; 
neither  time,  nor  distance,  nor  success,  nor  failure, 
nor  the  revolution  of  opinion,  nor  the  deaths  of 
friends.  Oxford  had  been  unjust  to  Froude, 
and  had  driven  out  one  of  her  most  illustrious 
sons  in  something  like  disgrace.  Yet  he  never 
wavered  in  his  affection  for  her,  and  after 
the  many  vicissitudes  of  his  life  he  came  back  to 
Oriel  with  the  spirits  of  a  boy.  The  spells  of 
Oxford,  like  the  spells  of  Medea,  disperse  the 
weight  of  years. 


CHAPTER    XI 

THE    END 

^HE   lectures  on  Erasmus  were   not   public ; 

A  they  were  delivered  in  Froude's  private  house 
at  Cherwell  Edge,  and  attended  only  by  members 
of  the  University  reading  for  the  Modern  History 
School.  His  public  lectures  on  the  Council  of 
Trent  and  on  English  seamen  had  been  so  much 
crowded  by  men  and  women,  young  and  old,  that 
candidates  for  honours  in  history  were  scarcely  able 
to  find  room.  Nothing  could  be  more  honourable 
to  Froude,  or  to  Oxford,  than  his  enthusiastic 
reception  by  his  old  University  at  the  close  of  his 
brilliant  and  laborious  career.  But  it  was  too 
much  for  him.  Like  Voltaire  in  Paris,  he  was 
stifled  with  flowers.  His  twentieth  discourse 
on  Erasmus  begins  with  the  pathetic  sentence, 

'  This  will  be  my  last  lecture,  for  the  life  of 
Erasmus  was  drawing  to  an  end."  So  was  his 
own.  His  final  task  in  this  world  was  the  prepara- 
tion of  Erasmus  for  the  press.  He  had  been  all 
his  life  accustomed  to  work  at  his  own  time,  and 
the  strain  of  living  by  rule  at  Oxford  had  told 
upon  him  more  than  he  knew.  Before  the  end 
of  the  summer  term  in  1894  he  left  Oxford  for 

413 


414  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

Devonshire,  worn  out  and  broken  down.  '  Educa- 
tion," he  wrote  in  his  last  letter  to  Skelton,  "  like 
so  much  else  in  these  days,  has  gone  mad,  and 
has  turned  into  a  large  examination  mill."  He 
was  so  much  exhausted  that  he  could  not  go  again 
to  Norway  with  Lord  Ducie,1  though  with  char- 
acteristic pluck  he  half  thought  of  paying  another 
visit  to  Sir  George  Grey  in  New  Zealand.  But 
it  was  not  to  be.  During  the  summer  his  strength 
failed,  and  it  became  known  that  the  disorder 
was  incurable.  With  philosophic  calmness  he 
awaited  the  inevitable  close,  feeling,  as  he  had 
always  felt,  that  he  was  in  the  hands  of  God. 
His  religion,  very  deep,  constant,  and  genuine, 
was  not  a  spiritual  emotion,  nor  a  dogmatic  creed, 
but  a  calm  and  steady  confidence  that,  whatever 
weak  mortals  might  do,  the  Judge  of  all  the  earth 
would  do  right.  "  It  is  impossible,"  said  Emerson, 
whom  he  loved  and  admired,  "for  a  man  not  to 
be  always  praying."  The  relations  of  such  men 
with  the  unseen  are  an  inseparable  part  of  their 
daily  lives.  Froude  had  no  more  sympathy  with 
the  self-complacent  "agnosticism"  of  modern 
thought  than  he  had  with  Catholic  authority  or 
ecstatic  revivalism.  To  fear  God  and  to  keep  His 
commandments  was  with  him  the  whole  duty  of 
man.  The  materialistic  hypothesis  he  rejected  as 

1  "Ducie  wanted  me  to  go  to  Norway  with  him,  salmon- 
fishing  ;  but  I  didn't  feel  that  I  could  do  justice  to  the  oppor- 
tunity. In  the  debased  state  to  which  I  am  reduced,  if  I 
hooked  a  thirty-pound  salmon,  I  should  only  pray  him  to  get 
off." — Table  Talk  o{  Shirley,  pp.  222,  223. 


THE    END  415 

incredible,  explaining  nothing,  meaning  nothing, 
a  presumptuous  attempt  to  put  ignorance  in  the 
place  of  knowledge. 

His  soul  had  always  dwelt  apart.  His  early 
training  did  not  encourage  spiritual  sympathy, 
and,  except  in  his  books,  he  habitually  kept 
silence  on  ultimate  things.  But  he  had  always 
thought  of  them ;  and  as  he  lay  dying,  in  almost 
the  last  moments  of  consciousness,  he  repeated 
clearly  to  himself  those  great,  those  superhuman 
lines  which  Shakespeare  puts  into  the  mouth  of 
Macbeth  between  his  wife's  death  and  his  own. 

To-morrow,  and  to-morrow,  and  to-morrow, 
Creeps  in  this  petty  pace  from  day  to  day 
To  the  last  syllable  of  recorded  time, 
And  all  our  yesterdays  have  lighted  fools 
The  way  to  dusty  death.     Out,  out,  brief  candle  ; 
Life's  but  a  walking  shadow,  a  poor  player, 
That  struts  and  frets  his  hour  upon  the  stage, 
And  then  is  heard  no  more. 

Still  later  he  murmured,  "  Shall  not  the  Judge 
of  all  the  earth  do  right?" 

He  died  on  the  2oth  of  October,  1894,  and  was 
buried  at  Salcombe  in  his  beloved  Devonshire 
not  far  from  his  beloved  sea.  He  "  made  his  ever- 
lasting mansion  upon  the  beached  verge  of  the 
salt  flood."  By  his  own  particular  desire  he  was 
described  on  his  tombstone  as  Regius  Professor 
of  Modern  History  at  Oxford,  so  deeply  did  he 
feel  the  complete  though  tardy  recognition  of 
the  place  he  had  made  for  himself  among  English 


416  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

historians.  Otherwise  he  was  the  most  unassum- 
ing of  men,  simple  and  natural  in  manner, 
never  putting  himself  forward,  patient  under 
the  most  hostile  criticism  which  did  not  impugn 
his  personal  veracity.  Although  the  malice  of 
Freeman  did  once  provoke  him  to  a  retort  the 
more  deadly  because  it  was  restrained,  he  suffered 
in  silence  all  the  detraction  which  followed  the 
reminiscences  and  the  biography  of  Carlyle.  His 
temper  was  singularly  placable,  and  he  bore  no 
malice.  His  father  and  his  eldest  brother  had 
not  treated  him  wisely  or  kindly.  But  neither 
of  Hurrell  Froude  nor  of  the  Archdeacon  did  he 
ever  speak  except  with  admiration  and  respect. 
His  early  training  hardened  him,  and  perhaps 
accounts  for  the  indifference  to  cruelty  which 
sometimes  disfigures  his  pages.  He  did  not  know 
what  a  mother's  affection  was  before  he  had  a 
wife  and  children  of  his  own.  Before  he  became 
an  honour  to  his  family  he  was  regarded  as 
a  disgrace  to  it,  and  not  until  the  first  two 
volumes  of  the  History  appeared  did  his  father 
believe  that  there  was  any  good  in  him.  Yet 
the  Archdeacon  was  always  his  ideal  clergy- 
man, and  the  Church  of  England  as  it  stood 
before  the  Oxford  Movement  was  his  model  com- 
munion. With  the  Evangelical  party,  represented 
to  him  by  his  Irish  friend,  Mr.  Cleaver,  he 
had  sympathetic  relations,  and  practical,  though 
not  doctrinal,  agreement.  His  temporary  lean- 
ing towards  Tractarianism  was  no  more  than 


THE    END  417 

personal  admiration  for  Newman,  and  he  took 
orders  not  because  he  was  a  High  Churchman, 
but  because  he  was  a  Fellow.  Yet  it  was  in 
some  respects  a  fortunate  accident,  which,  by 
shutting  him  out  from  other  professions,  drove 
him  into  literature.  Fiction  he  soon  learned 
to  avoid,  for  his  early  experiments  in  it  were 
failures,  and  in  later  years  his  least  successful 
book,  with  all  its  eloquence,  was  The  Two  Chiefs 
of  Dunboy.  As  an  historical  writer  he  has  few 
superiors,  and  his  essays  are  among  the  most 
delightful  in  our  tongue.  To  analyse  his  style 
is  as  difficult  as  not  to  feel  the  charm  of  it.  It  is 
as  smooth  as  the  motion  of  a  ship  sailing  on  a  calm 
sea,  and  yet  it  is  never  flat  nor  tame. 

Although  Froude,  like  Newman,  belonged  to  the 
Oriel  school,  he  has  a  spirit  which  is  not  of  any 
school,  which  breathes  from  the  wide  ocean  and  the 
liquid  air.  He  wrote,  for  all  his  scholarly  grace, 
like  a  man  of  flesh  and  blood,  not  a  pedant  nor  a 
doctrinaire.  Impartial  he  never  was,  nor  pretended 
to  be.  Dramatic  he  could  not  help  being,  and  yet 
his  own  opinions  were  seldom  concealed.  Three 
or  four  main  propositions  were  at  the  root  of  his 
mind.  He  held  the  Reformation  to  be  the  greatest 
and  most  beneficent  change  in  modern  history. 
He  believed  the  English  race  to  be  the  finest  in  the 
world.  He  disbelieved  in  equality,  and  in  Parlia- 
mentary government.  Essentially  an  aristocrat 
in  the  proper  sense  of  the  term,  he  cherished  the 
doctrine  of  submission  to  a  few  fit  persons,  qualified 
(2310)  27 


418  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

for  authority  by  training  and  experience.  These 
ideas  run  through  all  Froude's  historical  writing, 
which  takes  from  them  its  trend  and  colour. 
Whatever  else  the  male  Tudors  may  have  been, 
they  were  emphatically  men  ;  and  even  Elizabeth, 
whom  Froude  did  not  love,  had  a  commanding 
spirit.  Except  poor  priest-ridden  Mary,  who  had 
a  Spanish  mother  and  a  Spanish  husband,  they 
did  not  brook  control,  and  no  one  was  ever  more 
conscious  of  being  a  king  than  Henry  VIII.  To 
him,  as  to  Elizabeth,  the  Reformation  was  not 
dogmatic  but  practical,  the  subjection  of  the 
Church  to  the  State.  The  struggle  between  Pope 
and  sovereign  had  to  be  fought  out  before  the 
struggle  between  sovereign  and  Parliament  could 
begin. 

Liberals  thought  that  Froude  would  not  have 
been  on  the  side  of  the  Parliament,  and  they  joined 
High  Churchmen  in  attacking  him.  Spiritual  and 
democratic  power  were  to  him  equally  obnoxious. 
He  delighted  in  Plato's  simile  of  the  ship,  where 
the  majority  are  nothing,  and  the  captain  rules. 
His  opinions  were  not  popular,  except  his  dislike 
for  the  Church  of  Rome.  He  is  read  partly  for  his 
exquisite  diction,  and  partly  for  the  patriotic  fervour 
with  which  he  rejoices  in  the  achievements  of 
England,  especially  on  sea.  Rossetti's  fine  burden  : 

Lands  are  swayed  by  a  king  on  a  throne, 
The  sea  hath  no  king  but  God  alone  : 

might  be  a  motto  for  the  title-page  of  Froude.    The 


THE    END  419 

fallacy  that  brilliant  writers  are  superficial  ac- 
counts for  much  of  the  prejudice  in  academic  circles 
against  which  Froude  had  to  contend.  To  him  of 
all  men  it  was  inapplicable,  for  no  historian  studied 
original  documents  with  greater  zest.  That  he 
did  not  know  his  period  nobody  could  pretend. 
He  knew  it  so  much  better  than  his  critics  that 
few  of  them  could  even  criticise  him  intelligently. 
That  he  was  not  thoroughly  acquainted  with  the 
periods  preceding  his  own  may  be  more  plausibly 
argued.  There  must  of  course  be  some  limit. 
The  siege  of  Troy  can  be  told  without  mention 
of  Leda's  egg.  But  if  Froude  had  given  a 
little  more  time  to  Henry  VII.,  and  all  that 
followed  the  Battle  of  Bosworth,  he  would  have 
approached  the  fall  of  Wolsey  and  the  rise  of 
Cromwell  with  a  more  thorough  understanding  of 
cause  and  effect.  His  mind  moved  with  great 
rapidity,  and  went  so  directly  to  the  point  that 
the  circumstances  were  not  always  fully  weighed. 
It  is  possible  to  see  the  truth  too  clearly,  with- 
out allowance  for  drawbacks  and  qualifications. 
The  important  fact  about  Henry,  for  instance, 
is  that  he  was  a  statesman  who  had  to  provide 
for  a  peaceful  succession.  But  he  was  also  a 
wilful,  headstrong,  arbitrary  man,  spoiled  from  his 
cradle  by  flatterers,  and  determined  to  have  his 
own  way.  Froude  saw  the  absurdity  of  the  Blue- 
beard delusion,  and  did  immense  service  in 
exposing  it.  He  would  have  given  no  handle  to 
his  Roman  Catholic  and  Anglo-Catholic  enemies  if 


420  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

he  had  acknowledged  that  there  was  an  explana- 
tion of  the  error.  He  was  sometimes  carried  away 
by  his  own  eloquence,  and  his  convictions  grew 
stronger  as  he  expressed  them,  until  the  facts  on  the 
other  side  looked  so  small  that  they  were  ignored. 

History  deals,  and  can  only  deal,  with  con- 
sequences and  results.  Motives  and  intentions, 
however  interesting,  belong  to  another  sphere. 
Henry  and  Cromwell,  Mary  and  Pole,  Elizabeth 
and  Cecil,  are  tried  in  Froude' s  pages  by  the 
simple  test  of  what  they  did,  or  failed  to 
do,  for  England.  Froude  detested  and  despised 
the  cosmopolitan  philosophy  which  regards 
patriotic  sentiment  as  a  relic  of  barbarism.  He 
was  not  merely  an  historian  of  England,  but 
also  an  English  historian;  and  holding  Fisher  to 
be  a  traitor,  he  did  not  hesitate  to  justify  the 
execution  of  a  pious,  even  saintly  man.  Fisher 
would  no  doubt  have  said  that  it  was  far  more 
important  to  preserve  the  Catholic  faith  in  England 
than  to  keep  England  independent  of  Spain. 
Froude  would  have  replied  that  unless  the  nation 
punished  those  whe  sought  for  the  aid  of  Spanish 
troops  against  their  own  countrymen,  she  would 
soon  cease  to  be  a  nation  at  all.  His  critics  evaded 
the  point,  and  took  refuge  in  talk  about  bloody 
tyrants  wreaking  vengeance  upon  harmless  old 
men. 

If  patriotism  be  not  a  disqualification  for  an 
historian,  Froude  had  none.  Like  every  other 
writer,  he  made  mistakes.  But  he  was  laborious 


THE    END  421 

in  research,  a  master  of  narrative,  with  a  genius 
for  seizing  dramatic  points.  Above  all,  he  had 
imagination,  without  which  the  vastest  know- 
ledge is  as  a  ship  without  sails,  or  a  bird 
without  wings.  His  objects,  even  his  pre- 
judices, were  frankly  avowed,  and  his  prejudices 
gave  way  to  fresh  facts  or  reasons.  The  records 
at  Simancas,  for  instance,  completely  changed, 
and  changed  for  the  worse,  his  estimate  of 
Queen  Elizabeth's  character,  and  he  admitted 
it  at  once  with  his  transparent  candour.  To 
defend  Froude  against  mendacity  seems  like  an 
insult  to  his  memory,  for  if  he  loved  anything  it 
was  truth,  though  he  sometimes  spoke  in  a  cynical 
way  about  the  difficulty  of  attaining  it.  But 
such  monstrous  charges  were  made  against  him 
when  he  could  no  longer  reply  for  himself  that 
I  may  be  forgiven  for  quoting  an  authority  which 
will  command  general  respect.  Mr.  Andrew 
Lang  is  as  scrupulously  accurate  in  statement 
as  he  is  brilliantly  felicitous  in  style.  He  has 
studied  the  history  of  the  sixteenth  century, 
especially  in  Scotland,  and  he  disagrees  with 
Froude  on  many,  if  not  on  most,  of  the  points  in  dis- 
pute. Yet  this  is  Mr.  Lang's  deliberate  judgment : 
"  I  have  found  Mr.  Froude  often  in  error  ;  often, 
as  I  think,  misunderstanding,  misquoting,  omitting 
and  even  adding,  but  I  have  never  once  seen 
reason  to  suspect  him  of  conscious  misrepresenta- 
tion, of  knowingly  giving  a  false  impression.  .  .  . 
It  is  easy  to  show  that  Mr.  Froude  erred  contrary 


422  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

to  his  bias  on  occasion,  and  it  must  never  be  for- 
gotten that  he  did  what  no  consciously  dishonest 
historian  could  possibly  do.  He  deposited  at  the 
British  Museum  copies,  in  the  original  Spanish, 
of  the  documents,  very  difficult  of  access,  which 
he  used  in  his  History.  By  aid  of  these  tran- 
scripts, we  can  find  him  slipping  into  errors,  and 
his  action  in  presenting  the  country  with  the 
means  of  correcting  his  mistakes  proves  beyond 
doubt  that  he  did  not  consciously  make  mistakes. 
There  is  no  way  in  which  this  conclusion  can  be 
evaded.  No  historian  was  more  honest  than 
Mr.  Froude,  though  few  or  none  of  his  merit  have 
been  so  fallible." 

How  many  historians  of  his  merit  have  there 
been  ?  He  had  no  contemporary  rival  in  England, 
for  Carlyle  and  Macaulay  belonged  to  a  previous 
generation.  There  was  certainly  no  one  living 
when  Froude  died  who  could  have  written  the 
famous  passage  in  the  first  chapter  of  his  History 
about  the  decay  of  mediaevalism  : 

11  For,  indeed,  a  change  was  coming  upon  the 
world,  the  meaning  and  direction  of  which  even 
still  are  hidden  from  us,  a  change  from  era  to  era. 
The  paths  trodden  by  the  footsteps  of  ages  were 
broken  up ;  old  things  were  passing  away,  and 
the  faith  and  the  life  of  ten  centuries  were  dis- 
solving like  a  dream.  Chivalry  was  dying  ;  the 
abbey  and  the  castle  were  soon  together  to  crumble 
into  ruins  ;  and  all  the  forms,  desires,  beliefs, 
convictions  of  the  old  world  were  passing  away, 


THE   END  423 

never  to  return.  A  new  continent  had  risen  up 
beyond  the  western  sea.  The  floor  of  heaven, 
inlaid  with  stars,  had  sunk  back  into  an  infinite 
abyss  of  immeasurable  space  ;  and  the  fair  earth 
itself,  unfixed  from  its  foundations,  was  seen  to 
be  but  a  small  atom  in  the  awful  vastness  of  the 
universe.  In  the  fabric  of  habit  which  they  had 
so  laboriously  built  for  themselves,  mankind 
were  to  remain  no  longer.  And  now  it  is  all  gone 
— like  an  unsubstantial  pageant  faded ;  and 
between  us  and  the  old  English  themselves  a  gulf 
of  mystery  which  the  prose  of  the  historian  will 
never  adequately  bridge.  They  cannot  come 
to  us,  and  our  imagination  can  but  feebly  pene- 
trate to  them.  Only  among  the  aisles  of  the 
cathedrals,  only  before  the  silent  figures  sleeping 
on  the  tombs,  some  faint  conceptions  float  before 
us  of  what  these  men  were  when  they  were  alive, 
and  perhaps  in  the  sound  of  church  bells,  that 
peculiar  creation  of  the  middle  age,  which  falls 
upon  the  ear  like  the  echo  of  a  vanished  world." 

Although  Froude  cared  little  for  music,  the 
rhythm  of  his  sentences  is  musical,  and  the  organ- 
note  of  the  opening  words  in  the  quotation  carries 
a  reminiscence  of  Tacitus  which  will  not  escape  the 
classical  reader.  That  is  literary  artifice,  though 
a  very  high  form  of  it.  The  real  merit  of  the 
paragraph  is  not  so  much  its  eloquence  as  its  insight 
into  the  depth  of  things.  Many  respectable  his- 
torians see  only  the  outward  lineaments.  Froude 
saw  the  nation's  heart  and  soul.  It  was  the  same 


424  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

with  the  great  man  whose  biographer  Froude 
became.  Carlyle's  faults  would  have  been  im- 
possible in  a  character  mean  or  small.  They 
were  the  defects  of  his  qualities,  those 

Fears  of  the  brave,  and  follies  of  the  wise, 

which  do  not  wait  to  appear  till  the  last  scene  of 
life.  Now  that  more  than  twenty  years  have  passed 
since  the  final  volumes  of  the  Life  were  published, 
it  may  be  said  with  confidence  that  Carlyle  owes 
almost  as  much  to  Froude  as  to  his  own  writings 
for  his  high  and  enduring  fame.  "  Though  the  lives 
of  the  Carlyles  were  not  happy,"  says  Froude,  "  yet, 
if  we  look  at  them  from  the  beginning  to  the  end, 
they  were  grandly  beautiful.  Neither  of  them  pro- 
bably under  other  conditions  would  have  risen  to 
as  high  an  excellence  as  in  fact  they  each  actually 
achieved  ;  and  the  main  question  is  not  how  happy 
men  and  women  have  been  in  this  world,  but  what 
they  have  made  of  themselves."  l  The  loftier  a 
man's  own  view  of  mental  conceptions  and  sub- 
lunary things,  the  more  will  he  admire  Carlyle  as 
described  by  Froude.  The  same  Carlyle  who  made 
a  ridiculous  fuss  about  trifles  confronted  the 
real  evils  and  trials  of  life  with  a  dignity,  courage, 
and  composure  which  inspire  humble  reverence 
rather  than  vulgar  admiration.  Froude  rightly 
felt  that  Carlyle's  petty  grumbles,  often  most 
amusing,  throw  into  bright  and  strong  relief  his 
splendid  generosity  to  his  kinsfolk,  his  manly  pride 

1  Carlyle's  Early  Life,  i.  381. 


THE    END  425 

in  writing  what  was  good  instead  of  what  was 
lucrative,  his  anxiety  that  Mill  should  not  perceive 
what  he  lost  in  the  first  volume  of  The  French 
Revolution.  Whenever  a  crisis  came,  Carlyle  stood 
the  test.  The  greater  the  occasion,  the  better  he 
behaved.  One  thing  Froude  did  not  give,  and 
perhaps  no  biographer  could.  Carlyle  was  essen- 
tially a  humourist.  He  laughed  heartily  at  other 
people,  and  not  less  heartily  at  himself.  When 
he  was  letting  himself  go,  and  indulging  freely 
in  the  most  lurid  denunciations  of  all  and  sundry, 
he  would  give  a  peculiar  and  most  significant 
chuckle  which  cannot  be  put  into  print.  It  was 
a  warning  not  to  take  him  literally,  which  has 
too  often  passed  unheeded.  He  has  been  com- 
pared with  Swift,  but  he  was  not  really  a  mis- 
anthropist, and  no  man  loved  laughter  more,  or 
could  excite  more  uproarious  merriment  in  others. 
I  remember  a  sober  Scotsman,  by  no  means 
addicted  to  frivolous  merriment,  telling  me  that 
he  had  come  out  of  Carlyle' s  house  in  physical 
pain  from  continuous  laughter  at  an  imaginary 
dialogue  between  a  missionary  and  a  negro  which 
Carlyle  had  conducted  entirely  himself. 

Carlyle,  it  must  be  remembered,  knew  Froude' s 
historical  methods  quite  as  well  as  he  knew 
Froude.  It  was  because  he  knew  them,  and 
approved  of  them,  that  he  asked  Froude  to  be 
the  historian  of  Cheyne  Row.  Froude's  devo- 
tion to  him  had  indeed  been  singular.  During 
the  last  decade  of  his  life  Carlyle  was  very 


426  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

feeble,  and  required  constant  care.  He  came  to 
lean  upon  Froude  more  and  more,  requiring  his 
company  in  walks,  and  even  in  omnibuses,  until 
Froude  almost  ceased  to  be  his  own  master.  The 
lecturing  tour  in  the  United  States  and  the 
political  visits  to  South  Africa  were  permitted, 
because  they  were  thought  right.  But  Fraser's 
Magazine  had  to  be  given  up,  partly  that  employ- 
ment might  be  found  for  a  young  man  in  whom 
Carlyle  was  interested,  and  the  project  for  a  new 
history  of  Charles  V.  was  perforce  abandoned  It 
has  been  said,  though  not  by  any  one  who  knew 
the  facts,  that  Froude  profited  in  a  pecuniary 
sense  by  exchanging  history  for  biography.  The 
exact  opposite  is  the  truth.  From  1866  to  1869, 
the  last  years  of  his  great  book,  Froude  received 
from  Messrs.  Longman  about  fourteen  hundred 
pounds  a  year,  including  his  salary  as  editor  of 
Fraser,  which  he  relinquished  at  Carlyle' s  bidding. 
From  1877  to  1884  he  did  not  receive  more  than 
seven  hundred.  Two  volumes  of  history  brought 
in  about  as  much  as  three  of  biography,  and  there 
is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  Charles  V.  would  have 
proved  less  popular  than  Henry  VIII.  or  Elizabeth. 
Froude  was  unusually  prosperous  and  successful 
as  a  man  of  letters,  though  it  is  of  course  impossible 
for  the  highest  literary  work  to  be  adequately  paid. 
He  had  to  deal  with  liberal  publishers,  and  after 
1856  his  position  as  a  writer  was  assured.  The 
idea  that  necessity  drove  him  to  fill  his  pockets  at 
the  expense  of  a  dead  friend's  reputation  is  as 


THE    END  427 

preposterous  in  his  case  as  it  would  have  been 
in  Lockhart's  or  Stanley's. 

Had  Froude  been  the  cynic  he  is  often  called, 
he  would  have  borne  with  callous  indifference,  as 
he  did  bear  in  dignified  silence,  the  attacks  made 
upon  him  for  his  revelations  of  Carry le.  But 
Froude  was  not  what  he  seemed.  Behind  his 
stately  presence,  and  lofty  manner,  and  calmly 
audacious  speech,  there  was  a  singularly  sensitive 
nature.  He  would  do  what  he  thought  right  with 
perfect  fearlessness,  and  without  a  moment's 
hesitation.  When  the  consequences  followed  he 
was  not  always  prepared  for  them,  and  people  who 
were  not  worth  thinking  about  could  give  him 
pain.  Human  beings  are  composite  creatures, 
and  the  feminine  element  in  man  is  more  obvious 
than  the  masculine  element  in  woman.  Froude 
had  a  feminine  disposition  to  be  guided  by  feeling, 
and  to  remember  old  grievances  as  vividly  as  if 
they  had  happened  the  day  before.  He  was  also  a 
typical  west  countryman  in  habit  of  mind,  as  well 
as  in  face,  figure,  and  speech.  His  beautiful  voice, 
exquisitely  modulated,  never  raised  in  talk,  was 
thoroughly  Devonian.  So  too  were  his  imperfect 
sense  of  the  effect  produced  by  what  he  said  upon 
ordinary  minds,  and  his  love,  which  might  almost 
be  called  mischievous,  of  giving  small  electric 
shocks.  In  the  case  of  Carlyle,  however,  the  out- 
cry was  wholly  unexpected,  and  for  a  time  he  was 
distressed,  though  never  mastered,  by  it.  What 
he  could  not  understand,  what  it  took  him  a  long 


428  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

time  to  live  down,  was  that  friends  who  really  knew 
him  should  believe  him  capable  of  baseness  and 
treachery.  Now  that  it  is  all  over,  that  Froude's 
biography  has  taken  its  place  in  classical  literature, 
and  that  Mrs.  Carlyle's  letters  are  acknowledged  to 
be  among  the  best  in  the  language,  the  whole  story 
appears  like  a  nightmare.  But  it  was  real  enough 
twenty  years  ago,  when  people  who  never  read 
books  of  any  kind  thought  that  Froude  was  the 
name  of  the  man  that  whitewashed  Henry  VIII. 
and  blackened  Carlyle.  Froude  would  probably 
have  been  happier  if  he  had  turned  upon  his  assail- 
ants once  for  all,  as  he  once  finally  and  decisively 
turned  upon  Freeman.  Freeman,  however,  was 
an  open  enemy.  A  false  friend  is  a  more  difficult 
person  to  dispose  of,  and  even  to  deny  the 
charge  of  deliberate  treachery  hardly  consistent 
with  self-respect.  Long  before  Froude  died  the 
clamour  against  him  had  by  all  decent  people  been 
dropped.  But  he  himself  continued  to  feel  the 
effect  of  it  until  he  became  Professor  of  History 
at  Oxford.  That  rehabilitated  him,  where  only  he 
required  it,  in  his  own  eyes.  It  was  a  public 
recognition  by  the  country  through  the  Prime 
Minister  of  the  honour  he  had  reflected  upon 
Oxford  since  his  virtual  expulsion  in  1849,  ano^ 
he  felt  himself  again.  From  that  time  the  whole 
incident  was  blotted  from  his  mind,  and  he  forgot 
that  some  of  his  friends  had  forgotten  the  meaning 
of  friendship.  The  last  two  years  of  his  life  were 
indeed  the  fullest  he  had  ever  known.  Forty-two 


THE    END  429 

lectures  in  two  terms  at  the  age  of  seventy-four 
are  a  serious  undertaking.  Happily  he  knew 
the  sixteenth  century  so  well  that  the  process  of 
refreshing  his  memory  was  rather  a  pleasure  than 
a  task,  and  he  could  have  written  good  English  in 
his  sleep.  Yet  few  even  of  his  warmest  admirers 
expected  that  in  a  year  and  a  half  he  would 
compose  three  volumes  which  both  for  style  and 
for  substance  are  on  a  level  with  the  best  work 
of  his  prime.  It  was  less  surprising,  and  intensely 
characteristic,  that  his  subjects  should  be  the 
Reformation  and  the  sea. 

Froude's  religious  position  is  best  stated  in  his 
own  words,  written  when  he  was  in  South  Africa, 
to  a  member  of  his  family  : 

"  I  know  by  sad  experience  much  of  what  is 
passing  in  your  mind.  Although  my  young  days 
were  chequered  with  much  which  I  look  back 
on  with  regret  and  shame,  still  I  believe  I  always 
tried  to  learn  what  was  true,  and  when  I  had 
found  it  to  stick  to  it.  The  High  Church  theology 
was  long  attractive  to  me,  but  then  I  found,  or 
thought  I  found,  that  it  had  no  foundation,  and 
indeed  that  very  few  of  its  professors  in  their 
heart  of  hearts  believed  what  they  were  saying. 
Apostolic  Succession,  Sacramental  Grace,  and  the 
rest  of  it,  are  very  pretty,  but  are  they  facts  ? 
Is  it  a  fact  that  any  special  mysterious  power 
is  communicated  by  a  Bishop's  hands  ?  Is  it  a 
fact  that  a  child's  nature  is  changed  by  water  and 
words — or  that  the  bread  when  it  is  broken  ceases 


430  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

to  be  bread  ?    We  cannot  tell  that  it  is  not  so,  you 
say.     But  can  we  tell  that  it  is  so  ?  and  we  ought 
to  be  able  to  tell  before  we  believe  it.     All  that 
fell  away  from  me  when  I  came  in  contact  with 
the    Cleavers    and    their    friends.     Their    views 
never  commended  themselves  to  me  wholly  ;   but 
at  least  they  were   spiritual  and  not  material. 
And  election  is  a  fact,  although  they  express  it 
oddly — and  so   is  reprobation — and  so   is   what 
they  say  of  free  will,  and  so  is  conversion.     It  is 
true  that  we  bring  natures  into  the  world  which 
are  moulded  by  circumstances  and  by  their  own 
tendencies,  as  clay  in  the  hands  of  the  potter. 
Look  round  you  and  see  that  some  are  made  for 
honour  and  some  for  dishonour.     So  far  I  agree 
with  the  Evangelicals  still,  and  I  agree  too  with 
them  that  if  what  they  call  faith — that  is,  a  distinct 
conviction  of  sin,  a  resolution  to   say  to  oneself 
'Sammy,  my  boy,  this  won't  do/1  a  perception  and 
love  for  what  is  right  and  good,  and  a  loathing  of 
the  old  self — can  be  put  into  one,  and  by  the  grace 
of  God  we  see  that  it  can  be  and  is — the  whole 
nature  is  changed,  is  what  we  call  regenerated. 
This  is  certain — and  it  is  to  me  certain  also  that 
the  world  and  we  who  live  in  it,  with  all  these 
mysterious  conditions  of  our  being,  are  no  creation 
of  accident  or  blind  law.     We  were  created  for 

1  The  reference  is  to  Thackeray's  story  of  a  hairdresser  named 
Samuelj  who  remarked;  "  Mr.  Thackeray,  there  comes  a  time  in 
the  life  of  every  man  when  he  says  to  himself,  '  Sammy,  my 
boy,  this  won't  do.'"  The  story  was  an  especial  favourite  of 
Froude's. 


THE    END  431 

purposes  unknown  to  us  by  Almighty  God,  who 
is  using  us  and  training  us  for  His  own  objects — 
objects  wholly  unconceivable  by  us,  but  never- 
theless which  we  know  to  exist,  for  Intelligence 
never  works  but  for  an  end. 

"  Of  other  things  which  are  popularly  called 
religion,  I  have  my  opinion  positive  and  negative. 
But  religion  to  me  is  not  opinion — it  is  certainty. 
I  cannot  govern  my  actions  or  guide  my  deepest 
convictions    by    probabilities.     The    laws    which 
we  are  to  obey  and  the  obligations  to  obey  them 
are  part  of  my  being  of  which  I  am  as  sure  as  that 
I  am  alive.     The  things  to  argue  about  are  by 
their  nature  uncertain,  and  therefore  it  is  to  me 
inconceivable  that  in  them  can  lie  Religion.     I 
cannot  tell  whether  these  thoughts  will  be  of  any 
help  to  you.     But  it  is  better,  in  my  judgment, 
to  remain  a  proselyte  of  the  gate — resolute  to 
remain  there  till  one  receives  a  genuine  conviction 
of  some  truths  beyond — than  for  imagined  relief 
from  the  pain  of  suspense  to  take  up  by  an  act 
of  will  a  complete  system  of  belief,  Catholic  or 
Calvinistic,  and  insist  to  one's  own  soul  that  it 
is,   was,   and  shall  be  the  whole   and  complete 
truth.     Some  people  do  this — deliberately  blind 
their   eyes,   and   because   they   never   see   again 
declare  loudly  that  no  one  else  can  see.     Other 
people,  less  happy,  find  by  experience  that  they 
cannot  believe  what  they  have  taken  to  in  this 
way,   and  fly  for  a  change  to  the   next   theory 
and   then   to   the   next.      I    remain    for   myself 


432  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

unconvinced  of  much  which  is  generally  called 
the  essential  part  of  things  ;  but  convinced  with 
all  my  heart  of  what  I  regard  as  essential." 

Froude  made  no  secret  of  his  religious  opinions, 
and  they  may  be   collected   from  his  numerous 
books,  especially  perhaps  from  The  Oxford  Counter- 
Reformation.     A  curious  paper,  first  published  in 
1879,  called   "A  Siding  at   a  Railway  Station," 
is   one   of    his    most    direct    utterances    on    the 
subject.     It  will  be   found   in  the  fourth  series 
of  Short  Studies,  and  is  in  many  respects  the  most 
remarkable  of  them  all.     "  Some  years  ago,"  it 
begins,  "  I  was  travelling  by  railway,  no  matter 
whence  or  whither."     The  railway  is  life,  and  the 
siding  at  which  the  train  was  suddenly  stopped  is 
the  end  that  awaits  all  travellers  through  this 
world.     The  examination  of  the  luggage  is  the 
judgment  which  will  be  passed  upon  all  human 
actions  hereafter.     Wages  received  are  placed  on 
one  side,  and  value  to  mankind  of  services  rendered 
on  the  other.     Naturally  working  men  come  out 
best.     The  worst  show  is  made  by  idle  and  luxu- 
rious grandees.     Authors  occupy  a  middle  posi- 
tion, and  in  Froude' s  own  books  "  chapter  after 
chapter  vanished  away,  leaving  the  paper  clean  as 
if  no  compositor  had  ever  laboured  in  setting  type 
for  it.     Pale  and  illegible  became  the  fine-sounding 
paragraphs  on  which  I  had  secretly  prided  myself. 
A  few  passages,  however,  survived  here  and  there 
at  long  intervals.     They  were  those  on  which  I  had 
laboured  least  and  had  almost  forgotten,  or  those, 


THE    END  433 

as  I  observed  in  one  or  two  instances,  which  had 
been  selected  for  special  reprobation  in  the  weekly 
journals."  The  hit  at  The  Saturday  Review  is 
amusing  enough,  and  Froude  goes  on  to  plead 
successfully  that  though  he  may  have  been  ignor- 
ant, prejudiced,  or  careless,  no  charge  of  dishonesty 
could  be  established  against  him.  Apart  from  his 
own  personal  case,  the  allegory  means  little  more 
than  the  gospel  of  work  which  is  the  noblest  part 
in  the  teaching  of  Carlyle.  Titled  personages  come 
off  badly,  and  the  most  ridiculous  figure  in  the 
motley  throng  is  an  Archbishop.  Not  much  sym- 
pathy is  shown  with  any  one,  except  with  a  widow 
who  hopes  to  rejoin  her  husband,  and  sympathy 
is  all  that  Froude  can  give  her. 

Of  Froude' s  friendships  much  has  been  said. 
They  were  numerous,  and  drawn  from  very 
different  classes.  Beginning  at  Oxford,  they  in- 
creased rather  than  diminished  throughout  his 
life,  notwithstanding  the  gaps  which  death  in- 
evitably and  inexorably  made.  To  one  Fellow 
of  Exeter  who  stood  by  him  in  his  troubles,  George 
Butler,  afterwards  Canon  of  Winchester,  he  re- 
mained always  attached.  Dean  Stanley  throughout 
life  he  loved,  and  another  clerical  friend,  Cowley 
Powles.  Of  the  many  persons  who  felt  dough's 
early  death  as  an  irreparable  calamity  there  was 
hardly  one  who  felt  it  more  than  Froude.  His 
affectionate  reverence  for  Newman  was  proof 
against  a  mental  and  moral  antagonism  which 
could  not  be  bridged.  After  Kingsley's  death  he 
(3310)  28 


434  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

wrote,  from  the  Molt,  to  Mrs.  Kingsley  :  "  DEAREST 
FANNY, — You  tell  me  not  to  write,  so  I  will  say 
nothing  beyond  telling  you  how  deeply  I  am 
affected  by  your  thought  of  me.  The  old  times  are 
as  fresh  in  my  mind  as  in  yours.  You  and  Charles 
were  the  best  and  truest  friends  I  ever  had.  We 
shall  soon  be  all  together  again.  God  bless  you 
now  and  in  eternity. 

"  Your  affectionate  J.  A.  FROUDE." 

"  Cowley  Powles  is  here.  It  was  he  who  first 
took  me  to  Eversley." 

It  was  when  he  came  to  London  that  Froude 
enlarged  the  circle  of  his  friends,  Carlyle  being 
the  greatest  and  the  chief.  Among  the  con- 
tributors to  Eraser's  Magazine  those  whom  he 
knew  best  were  the  late  Sir  John  Skelton, 
"  Shirley,"  and  the  present  Sir  Theodore  Martin, 
the  biographer  of  the  Prince  Consort,  whom 
some  still  prefer  to  associate  with  those  delightful 
parodies,  the  Bon  Gaultier  Ballads.  The  enumera- 
tion of  Froude' s  London  acquaintances  would 
be  merely  a  social  chronicle,  with  the  supplement 
of  some  names,  such  as  General  Cluseret's,  quite 
outside  the  ordinary  groove.  He  could  get  on 
with  any  one,  and  he  was  interested  in  every 
one  who  had  interesting  qualities.  After  his 
second  marriage  his  dinner-parties  in  Onslow 
Gardens  were  famous  for  their  brilliancy  and 
charm.  His  magnetic  personality  drew  from 
people  whatever  they  had,  while  his  ease  of  man- 
ner made  them  feel  at  home.  It  was  perhaps 


THE  END  435 

because  he  never  pretended   to  know  anything 
that  only  scholars  realised  how  much  he  knew, 
and  that  he  seemed  to  be  not  so  much  a  man  of 
letters  as  a  man  of  the  world.     Of  all  the  friends 
he  made  in  later  life  there  was  not  one  that  he 
valued   more   highly   than    Lord   Wolseley.     "  I 
have  been  staying,"   he  wrote  to  his  daughter, 
from  South  Africa,   "  with  Sir  Garnet  Wolseley 
and  his  brilliant  staff.     It  was  worth  a  voyage  to 
South  Africa  to  make  so  intimate  an  acquaintance 
with   him."     After   his   second  return   from  the 
Cape,  when  his  social  life  in  London  was  taken 
up  again,  with  his  eldest  daughter  in  her  step- 
mother's place,  there  were  added  to  the  military 
and  naval  officers  he  had  met,  the  Irish  Protestants, 
who  regarded  him  as  their  champion,   and  the 
wide  circle  of  his  ordinary  associates,  an  Africander 
contingent,  made  up  of  all  parties  in  that  troubled 
area.    There  were,  in  fact,  few  phases  of  human 
life  with  which  Froude  was  not  familiar,  from 
Devonshire  fishermen  to  Cabinet  Ministers.     Al- 
though he  knew  and  admired  Mr.  Chamberlain, 
his  greatest  political  friends  were  Lord  Carnarvon 
and  Lord  Derby,  with  whom  he  almost  invariably 
agreed.    The  man  of  science  whom,  after  his  own 
brother,   he   knew   best,   was   Tyndall.     Men   of 
letters   were   familiar   to   him   in   every   degree. 
Among  the  houses  where  he  was  a  frequent  and 
welcome  guest  were  Knowsley,  Highclere,  Tort- 
worth,  and  Castle  Howard.     In  his  own   family 
there    were    troubles    and    bereavements.      His 


436  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

eldest  son,  who  died  before  him,  gave  him  much 
trouble  and  anxiety.  His  second  daughter  died 
of  consumption  a  few  months  after  her  step- 
mother, while  he  was  in  South  Africa  alone. 
Otherwise,  his  relations  with  his  children  were 
perfect  and  unbroken,  for  no  father  was  more 
beloved  and  adored.  Indeed,  all  intelligent  chil- 
dren delighted  in  his  company,  because  they  could 
not  help  understanding  him,  and  yet  he  paid 
them  the  acceptable  compliment  of  talking  to 
them  as  if  they  were  grown  up. 

There  is  nothing  in  the  world  more  evanescent 
than  good  conversation.  Froude  was  one  of  the 
best  and  most  agreeable  talkers  of  his  day.  He 
could  talk  to  old  and  young,  to  men,  women, 
and  children,  to  Devonshire  seamen  or  labourers, 
to  the  most  highly  cultivated  society  of  Oxford 
or  London,  with  equal  ease  and  equal  enjoyment. 
He  never  tried  to  monopolise  the  conversation, 
and  yet  somehow  the  chief  share  fell  naturally 
to  him.  If  he  were  bored,  he  could  be  as  silent 
as  the  grave.  But  when  his  interest  was  roused, 
and  most  things  roused  it,  he  always  had  some- 
thing pointed  and  forcible  to  say.  He  was  not 
always  a  sympathetic  hearer.  Once  he  sat  be- 
tween two  extremely  intellectual  women  who 
considered  themselves  leaders  of  advanced  thought. 
When  they  left  the  room  after  dinner  he  turned 
to  a  friend  of  mine,  and  said  simply,  "  I  think 
all  these  bigots  ought  to  be  burnt."  Such  de- 
plorable intolerance  was  happily  rare.  Less  rare, 


THE   END  437 

perhaps,  were  his  irresistible  sense  of  the  ludic- 
rous and  irrepressible  tendency  to  sarcasm.  Of  a 
famous  clergyman  he  said,  "  At  least  they  have 
not  put  him  into  a  bishop's  apron,  the  emblem  of 
our  first  parents'  shame."  "  What  can  education 
do  for  a  man,"  he  once  asked,  "except  enable  him 
to  tell  a  lie  in  five  ways  instead  of  one  ?  "  As  a 
rule,  Froude,  like  most  good  talkers,  listened  well, 
and  responded  readily.  If  he  had  not  Carlyle's 
rich,  exuberant  humour,  he  was  also  without  the 
prophet's  leaning  to  dogmatism  and  anathema. 
Sardonic  irony  was  his  nearest  approach  to  an 
offensive  weapon,  and  even  in  that  he  was  sparing. 
But  he  had  a  look  which  seemed  to  say,  "  Don't 
offer  me  any  theories,  or  creeds,  or  speculations, 
for  I  have  tried  them  all." 

Perhaps  I  may  be  permitted  in  this  connection 
to  describe  my  one  and  only  experience  of  Froude 
and  his  ways.  It  was  after  dinner,  and  the  talk 
had  fallen  into  the  hands,  or  the  mouth,  of  an 
eminent  administrator,  who  seemed  to  be  a  pillar, 
a  model  of  talent  and  virtue.  His  language  was 
copious,  his  subject  "  schoolmaster  Bishops," 
and  the  services  they  had  rendered  to  the  Church 
of  England.  Bishop  Blomfield,  for  example,  had 
procured  the  appointment  of  the  Ecclesiastical 
Commission.  There  might,  for  aught  we  knew, 
be  endless  examples,  and  the  prospect  was  appal- 
ling. The  host  was  a  Roman  Catholic,  and  the 
guests  were  not  ecclesiastical.  Froude  came  to 
the  rescue.  In  a  gentle  voice,  and  with  the  air  of 


438  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

an  anxious  inquirer,  he  asked  whether  Dr.  Blom- 
field  had  happened  to  acquaint  the  Commissioners 
with  the  nature  and  extent  of  his  own  emoluments. 
Then,  without  pausing  for  a  reply,  he  added, 
still  gently,  "  Because  it  always  used  to  be  said 
that  there  were  only  two  persons  who  knew  what 
the  Bishop  of  London's  income  was ;  himself 
and  the  devil."  The  remark  may  not  have  been 
a  new  one.  It  was  not  offered  as  such,  but  it 
served  its  purpose,  for  the  interrupted  lecture 
was  never  resumed. 

Froude's  vast  reading  and  his  wide  human 
experience  enabled  him  to  hold  his  own  in  any 
company,  but  he  never  paraded  his  knowledge, 
or  lay  in  wait  to  trip  people  up.  Although  the 
prospect  of  going  out  worried  him,  and  his  first 
impulse  was  to  refuse  an  invitation,  he  enjoyed 
society  when  he  was  in  it,  being  neither  vain  nor 
shy.  At  Oxford  he  could  not  dine  out.  Late 
hours  interfered  with  his  work.  But  he  was 
hospitable  both  to  tutors  and  to  undergraduates, 
liking  to  show  himself  at  home  in  the  old  place. 
Except  for  the  failure  of  his  health,  perhaps  in 
spite  of  it,  his  enjoyment  of  his  Oxford  professor- 
ship was  unmixed.  He  did  not  hold  it  long 
enough  to  feel  the  brevity  of  the  generations 
which  makes  the  real  sadness  of  the  place.  Many 
ghosts  he  must  have  seen,  but  he  had  reached 
an  age  when  men  are  prepared  for  them,  and 
his  academic  career  in  the  forties  had  come  to 
such  an  unfortunate  end  that  comparison  of  the 


THE   END  439 

past  with  the  present  can  only  have  been  cheerful 
and  honourable.  He  found  a  Provost  of  Oriel  and 
a  Rector  of  Exeter  who  could  read  his  books, 
and  appreciate  them,  without  prejudice  against 
the  author.  But  indeed,  though  he  was  capable 
of  being  profoundly  bored,  he  was  at  his  ease  in 
the  most  diverse  societies,  and  no  form  of  con- 
versation not  absolutely  foolish  came  amiss  to 
him.  He  had  read  so  many  books,  and  seen  so 
much  of  the  world,  he  held  such  strong  opinions, 
and  expressed  them  with  such  placid  freedom, 
that  he  never  failed  to  command  attention,  or 
to  deserve  it.  Contemptuous  enough,  perhaps 
too  contemptuous,  of  human  frailties,  he  at  least 
knew  how  to  make  them  entertaining,  and  his 
urbane  irony  dissolved  pretentious  egoism. 

It  is  a  familiar  saying  that  men's  characters  and 
habits  are  formed  in  the  earliest  years  of  their 
lives.  Froude  was  by  profession  and  by  choice  a 
man  of  letters.  He  loved  writing,  and  whatever 
he  read,  or  heard,  or  saw,  turned  itself  without 
effort  into  literary  shape.  The  occupations  and 
amusements  of  his  life  can  be  traced  in  his  Short 
Studies.  But  he  had  not  been  reared  in  a  literary 
atmosphere.  He  had  been  brought  up  among  horses 
and  dogs,  with  grooms  and  keepers,  on  the  moors 
and  the  sea.  He  describes  it  himself  as  "  the  old 
wild  scratch  way,  when  the  keeper  was  the  rabbit- 
catcher,  and  sporting  was  enjoyed  more  for  the 
adventure  than  for  the  bag."  He  never  lost  his 
love  of  sport,  and  he  gave  his  own  son  the  same 


440  LIFE   OF   FROUDE 

training  he  had  himself.  Even  in  his  last  illness 
he  liked  the  young  man  to  go  out  shooting,  and 
always  asked  what  sport  he  had  had.  His  own 
father  had  been  a  country  gentleman,  as  well  as 
a  clergyman,  and  his  brothers,  while  their  health 
lasted,  all  rode  to  hounds.  He  himself  never 
forgot  how  he  had  been  put  by  Robert  on  a 
horse  without  a  saddle,  and  thrown  seventeen 
times  in  one  afternoon  without  hurting  himself 
on  the  soft  Devonshire  grass.  He  went  out 
shooting  with  his  brothers  long  before  he  could 
himself  shoot.  For  his  first  two  years  at  Oxford 
he  had  done  little  except  ride,  and  boat,  and 
play  tennis.  At  Plas  Gwynant  he  was  as  much 
out  of  doors  as  in,  and  even  to  the  last  his 
physical  enjoyment  of  an  expedition  in  the  open 
air  was  intense.  Yet  this  was  the  same  man  who 
could  sit  patiently  down  at  Simancas  in  a  room 
full  of  dusty,  disorderly  documents,  ill  written  in 
a  foreign  tongue,  and  patiently  decipher  them  all. 
If  a  healthy  mind  in  a  healthy  body  be,  as  the 
Roman  satirist  says,  the  greatest  of  blessings, 
Froude  was  certainly  blessed.  The  hardness  of 
his  frame,  and  the  soundness  of  his  nerves,  gave 
him  the  imperturbable  temper  which  Marlborough 
is  said  to  have  valued  more  than  money  itself. 
Of  money  Froude  was  always  careful,  and  he  was 
most  judicious  in  his  investments.  He  held  the 
Puritan  view  of  luxury  as  a  thing  bad  in  itself,  and 
the  parent  of  evil,  relaxing  the  moral  fibre.  The 
sternness  of  temperamentj  he^had  inherited  from 


THE   END  441 

his  father  was  concealed  by  an  easy,  sociable  dis- 
position, inclined  to  make  the  best  of  the  present, 
but  it  was  always  there.  In  the  struggle  between 
Knox  and  Mary  Stuart  all  his  sympathies  are  with 
Knox,  who  had  the  root  of  the  matter  in  him, 
Calvinism  and  the  moral  law.  Few  imaginative 
artists  could  have  resisted  as  he  did  the  temptation 
to  draw  a  dazzling  picture  of  Mary's  charms  and 
accomplishments,  scholarship  and  statesmanship, 
beauty  and  wit.  Froude  felt  of  her  as  Jehu  felt 
of  Jezebel,  that  she  was  the  enemy  of  the  people 
of  God.  So  with  his  own  contemporaries,  such 
as  Carry  le's  "  copper  captain,"  Louis  Napoleon. 
He  was  never  dazzled  by  the  blaze  of  the  Tuileries 
and  the  glare  of  temporary  success.  He  might 
have  said  after  Boileau,  J'appelle  un  chat  un  chat, 
et  Louis  un  fripon. 

The  peculiarity  of  Froude's  nature  was  to 
combine  this  firm  foundation  with  superficial 
layers  of  cynicism,  paradox,  and  irony,  as  in  his 
apology  for  the  rack,  his  character  of  Henry  VIII., 
his  defence  of  Cranmer's  churchmanship,  and 
Parker's.  He  shared  with  Carry le  the  belief  that 
conventional  views  were  sham  views,  and  ought  to 
be  exposed.  Ridicule,  if  not  a  test  of  truth,  is 
at  all  events  a  weapon  against  falsehood,  and  has 
done  much  to  clear  the  air  of  history.  Froude's 
sense  of  humour  was  rather  receptive  than  ex- 
pansive, and  he  did  not  often  display  it  in  his 
writings.  Tristram  Shandy  he  knew  almost  by 
heart,  and  he  never  tired  of  Candide,  or  Zadig. 


442  LIFE    OF    FROUDE 

Voltaire's  wit  and  Sterne's  humour  have  not  in 
their  own  lines  been  surpassed.  But  sure  as 
Froude's  taste  was  in  such  matters,  he  did  not 
himself  enter  the  lists  as  a  competitor.  He  was 
too  much  occupied  with  his  narrative,  or  his  theory, 
as  the  case  might  be,  to  spare  time  for  such 
diversion  by  the  way.  He  was  too  earnest  to  be 
impartial. 

Where  is  the  impartial  historian  to  be  found  ? 
Macaulay  said  in  Hallam.     The  clerical  editor  of 
Bishop  Stubbs's  Letters  thinks  that  Hallam,  who 
was  an  Erastian,  had  a  violent  prejudice  against 
the  Church.     His  impartial  historian  is  Stubbs,  for 
the  simple  reason  that  he  agrees  with  him.    Froude 
was  for  England  against  Rome  and  Spain.  He  could 
oppose  the  foreign  policy  of  an  English  Government 
when  he  thought  it  wrong,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
Crimean  War,  and  of  Disraeli's  aggressive  Imperi- 
alism in   1877.     But   the   English   cause   in  the 
sixteenth  century  he   regarded  as   national   and 
religious,   making  for  freedom  and  independence 
of  policy  and  thought.     To  be  free,  to  understand, 
to  enjoy,  said  Thomas  Hill  Green,  is  the  claim  of 
the   modern  spirit.   Froude  would  not  have  ad- 
mitted that  man  in  the  philosophic  sense  was  free, 
or  that  he  could  ever  hope  to  understand  the  ulti- 
mate causes  of  things.     And,  though  no  man  was 
more  capable  of  enjoying  the  present  moment, 
he  would  have  sternly  denied  that  pleasure,  how- 
ever  refined,  could  be  a  legitimate  aim  in   life. 
He  was  a  disciple  of -the  porch,  and  not  of  the 


THE    END  443 

garden.  It  was  deeds  of  chivalry  and  endurance 
that  he  held  up  to  the  admiration  of  mankind. 
The  hero  of  his  History,  William  Cecil,  Lord 
Burghley,  was  not  a  man  of  brilliant  gifts  or 
dazzling  attainments,  but  a  sober,  solid,  servant 
of  duty  and  of  the  State.  To  most  people 
Burghley  is  a  far  less  interesting  figure  than  his 
haughty  and  splendid  sovereign,  or  the  beautiful 
and  seductive  queen  against  whom  he  protected 
her.  Froude  judged  Burghley,  as  he  judged  Eliza- 
beth Tudor  and  Mary  Stuart,  by  the  standards 
of  political  integrity  and  personal  honour.  The 
secret  of  Froude' s  influence  and  the  source  of 
his  power  is  that  beneath  the  attraction  of  his 
personality  and  the  seductiveness  of  his  writing 
there  lay  a  bedrock  of  principle  which  could  never 
be  moved. 

Professor  Sanday,  who  preached  the  first  Uni- 
versity sermon  at  Oxford  after  Froude' s  death, 
referred  to  his  "  fifty  years  of  unwearied  literary 
activity."  The  period  of  course  included,  and 
was  meant  to  include,  The  Nemesis  of  Faith. 
'  We  all  know,"  continued  Dr.  Sanday,  "  how 
the  young  and  ardent  Churchman  followed  his 
reason  where  it  seemed  to  lead,  and  sacrificed  a 
Fellowship,  and,  as  it  seemed,  a  career,  to  scruples 
of  conscience.  .  .  .  Now  we  can  see  that  the 
difficulties  which  led  to  it  were  real  difficulties.  It 
was  right  and  not  wrong  that  they  should  be  raised 
and  faced."  It  is  the  fashion  to  regard  scruples 
of  conscience  as  morbid,  and  the  last  man  who 


444  LIFE    OF   FROUDE 

troubled  himself  about  a  test  was  not  a  young 
and  ardent  Churchman,  but  Charles  Bradlaugh. 
Froude  was  "  ever  a  fighter,"  who  wished  always 
to  fight  fair.  He  preferred  resigning  his  Fellow- 
ship to  fighting  for  it  on  purely  legal  grounds, 
and  holding  it,  if  he  could  have  held  it,  in  the 
teeth  of  the  College  Statutes.  More  than  twenty 
years  elapsed  before  the  tests  which  condemned 
him  were  abolished,  and  in  that  time  there  must 
have  been  many  less  orthodox  Fellows  than 
he.  It  was  more  than  twenty  years  before  he 
could  lay  aside  the  orders  which  in  a  rash  moment 
under  an  evil  system  he  had  assumed.  But  he 
was  a  preacher,  though  a  lay  one,  and  his  life 
was  a  struggle  for  the  causes  in  which  he  believed. 
Ecclesiastical  controversies  never  really  interested 
him,  except  so  far  as  they  touched  upon  national 
life  and  character.  He  wished  to  see  the  work 
of  the  sixteenth  century  continued  in  the  nine- 
teenth by  the  naval  power  and  the  Colonial 
possessions  of  England.  "  England  "  with  him 
meant  not  merely  that  part  of  Great  Britain 
which  lies  south  of  the  Tweed,  but  all  the 
dominions  of  the  Sovereign,  the  British  Empire 
as  a  whole.  What  Seeley  called  the  expansion 
of  England  was  to  him  the  chief  fact  of  the  present, 
and  the  chief  problem  of  the  future.  Events 
since  his  death  have  vindicated  his  foresight. 
He  urged  and  predicted  the  Australian  Federation, 
which  he  did  not  live  to  see.  To  the  policy  which 
impeded  the  Federation  of  South  Africa  he  was 


THE   END  445 

steadily  opposed.  The  moral  which  he  drew 
from  his  travels  in  Australasia,  and  in  the  West 
Indies,  was  the  need  for  strengthening  imperial 
ties.  Lord  Beaconsfield's  Imperialism  was  not 
to  his  taste,  and  he  disliked  every  form  of  aggres- 
sion or  pretence.  While  he  dreaded  the  inter- 
vention of  party  leaders,  and  desired  the  Colonies 
to  take  the  initiative  themselves,  he  thought  that 
a  common  tariff  was  the  direction  in  which  true 
Imperialism  should  move.  Whether  he  was  right 
or  wrong  is  too  large  a  question  to  be  discussed 
here.  That  matter  must  make  its  own  proof. 
But  in  raising  it  Froude  was  a  pioneer,  and, 
though  a  man  of  letters,  saw  more  plainly  than 
practical  politicians  what  were  the  questions  they 
would  have  to  solve.  He  despised  local  jealousies, 
and  took  large  views.  Many  men,  perhaps  most 
men,  contract  their  horizon  with  advancing  years. 
Froude' s  vision  seemed  to  widen.  Through  the 
storms  and  mists  of  passion  and  prejudice 
which  blinded  the  eyes  of  Liberals  and  Conser- 
vatives fighting  each  other  at  Westminster, 
he  looked  to  the  ultimate  union  of  all  British 
subjects  in  an  England  conterminous  with  the 
sovereignty  of  the  Crown.  It  was  that  England 
of  which  he  wrote  the  history.  It  was  knowledge 
of  her  past,  and  belief  in  her  future,  that  inspired 
the  work  of  his  life. 

THE    END 


INDEX 


ABERDEEN,  LORD,  88 
Alva,  Duke  of,  158,  159 
Aragon,  Queen  Katharine  of,  76, 

95,  99,  100,  no,  137 
Arnold,  Matthew,  39,  59,  62, 129, 

145 
Arnold,   Thomas,  D.D.    n,   15, 

383 

Ashburton,  Lady,  299,  300 
Austin,  Mrs.,  309 

BABINGTON,  ANTHONY,  165 
Barkly,   Sir    Henry,    254,    256, 

262,  266-268 
Beaconsfield,  Lord,  36,  117,  133, 

150,  252,  253,  277,  278,  281, 

284,  367-375»  442,  445 
Beaton,  Cardinal,  145 
Becket,  Thomas,  14,  173 
Bismarck,  Prince,  285 
Blomfield,  Bishop,  437,  438 
Boleyn,  Queen  Anne,  69,  76,  95, 

loo,  101,  106,  396 
Bonner,  Archbishop,  107,  122 
Borromeo,  Carlo,  140 
Brand,  President,  254,  256,  261, 

273 

Brewer,  Prof.,  176,  186 
Bright,  John,  212,  281,  356 
Browning,  Robert,  129 
Buckle,  Henry,  67,  130,  131,  395 
Bunsen,  Chevalier,  52 
Bunyan,  John,  343,  344 
Burghley,  Lord,    109,    117,   119, 

125,   143,   158,   159,   164,  400, 

401,  420,  443 
Burke,  Edmund,  234,  236,  238, 

239,  243,  356,  393 


Burke,    Father,    217-219,    220, 

223,  247,  354 
Burton,  J.  H.,  172 
Bury,  Prof.,  131 
Butler,  George,  433 
Butler,  Bishop,  25,  55,  39 

CAMPEGGIO,  CARDINAL,  76 

Campian,  Edmund,  140,  141 

Carlyle,  James,  309 

Carlyle,  John,  301,  302 

Carlyle,  Mrs.  Alexander,  302, 
304,  306-311,  331,  332 

Carlyle,  Thomas,  31,  41,  46,  55  ; 
he  makes  Froude's  acquaint- 
ance, 67  ;  his  judgment  on  the 
first  chapter  of  The  History, 
80-85  »  hi3  verdict  on  the 
second  chapter,  85-86 ;  his 
influence  upon  Froude,  78,  87, 
88,  90,  94,  97,  104,  130,  132, 

133,  2OI,  2IO,  22O,  227,  246, 
258,  270,  28l,  301,  341,  342, 

349,  396,  397  ;  his  introduc- 
tion to  Lady  Salisbury,  117; 
his  approval  of  Froude's 
American  tour,  228  ;  extract 
from  letter  to  Mrs.  Froude  on, 
229  ;  letter  to  Froude  on  The 
English  in  Ireland,  242,  243  ; 
his  intimate  friendship  with 
Froude,  291,  292,  296,  297, 
387  ;  his  brilliant  conversa- 
tional powers,  291  ;  his  treat- 
ment of  Mrs.  Carlyle,  293,  294  ; 
he  hands  over  to  Froude 
Mrs.  Carlyle's  letters  and 
biographical  fragments,  294  ; 


447 


448 


INDEX 


'  extract  from  letter  to  Froude 
regarding  publication  of,  294  ; 
extract  from  will  regarding  the 
Letters  and  Memorials  and 
biography,  296,  297  ;  Froude 
asked  to  undertake  biography, 
297,  298  ;  his  death,  303  ; 
publication  of  Reminiscences, 
303  ;  Froude  accused  of  vio- 
lating his  directions,  307  ; 
Froude's  defence,  307,  308  ; 
Mary  Carlyle  attempts  to 
secure  another  biographer, 
308  ;  publication  of  first  two 
volumes  of  Life,  312;  publica- 
tion of  Mrs.  Carlyle's  Letters 
and  Memorials,  320  ;  publica- 
tion of  Life  in  London,  322  ; 
his  dislike  of  Froude's  Ccesar, 
342,  343  ;  extract  from  letter 
to  Miss  D.  Bromley  on  The 
English  in  Ireland,  367  ;  survey 
of  character  and  his  rela- 
tions with  Froude,  423-426 

Carlyle,  Mrs.,  289,  290,  292,  293, 
295,  296-309,  315,  316,  320, 

323.  427 

Carnarvon,  Lord,  133,  252,  253- 
255,  258,  262,  264,  266,  269, 
273-27S.  277,  278,  281,  329, 

435 

Cecil,  William  (see  Lord  Burgh- 
ley) 

Chamberlain,  Mr.  J.,  345,  346, 

435 

Chambers,  Robert,  38 
Charles  II.,  214,  215,  288 
Charles  V.,  426 
Church,  Dean,  7,  19,  61 
Clare,  Lord,  219,  235,  240,  241, 

244 

Cleaver,  Mr.,  26-30,  416 
Clough,  Arthur  Hugh,  39,  40,  41- 

44,  58,  59,  66,  129,  130,  433 
Cluseret,  General,  434 
Cobden,  Richard,  90,  201 
Coleridge,  Rev.  G.  May,  37 
Coleridge,  John  Duke,  37 


Colley,  Sir  George,  269,  270 
Cook,  Douglas,  224 
Cornwallis,  Lord,  236,  237,  241 
Cranmer,  Archbishop,   100,  107, 

108,  112,  124,  183,  400,  440 
Cromwell,  Oliver,  88,   140,  201, 

213,  214,  215,  335,  365 
Cromwell,  Thomas,  76,  89,  102, 

112,  125,  400,  420 

DE  MEDICI,  Catherine,  122 
Derby,  Lady,  117,  118,  127,  193, 
243,  244,  251,  252,  277,  278, 
279,  280,  329,  330,  342,  343, 

344,  345,  346,  347,  369,  378, 
380 

Derby,  Lord,  117,  279,  281,  282, 
284,  285,  328,  329,  342,  344, 

345,  353,  369,  435 

Disraeli,    Benjamin    (see    Lord 

Beaconsfield) 

Donne,  William  Bodham,  113 
Doyle,  John,  67 
Doyle,  Richard,  67 
Drummond,  Thomas,  28 
Dufferin,  Lord,  253,  338 
Ducie,  Lord,  203,  378,  414 

EDWARD  VI.,  101,  107 

Elizabeth,  Queen,  30,  64,  75, 
77,  78,92,  ioo,  115,  119-123, 
126,  136,  137,  139-141,  143, 

156,     163-165,    212,    213,    4OO, 

417,  420,  421,  426,  443 
Emerson,  R.  W.,  31,  41,  205 
Erasmus,  99,  103,  403-409,  413 
Essex,  Earl  of,  199 

FISHER,  BISHOP,  63,  75,  95,  102, 
103,  106,  112,  148,  176,  190, 
194,  419 

Fitzgerald,  Lord  Edward,  247 
Fitzwilliam,  Earl,  244,  246,  247, 
Forster,  John,  296,  297,  301 
Freeman,  Edward  Augustus,  his 
neglect    of    historical  -manu- 
scripts  and   documents,    148, 
171,  177  ;  his  qualifications  as 


INDEX 


449 


an  historian,  149,  151  ;  his 
religious  and  political  views, 
149,  150;  his  antipathy  to 
Froude,  150-153  ;  his  re- 
viewing tactics  and  methods, 
153,  154,  155-157  5  his  com- 
ments on  Froude' s  methods  of 
treating  historical  documents, 
157-159  ;  his  attitude  towards 
original  research,  160,  242 ; 
his  discovery  of  two  faults  in 
The  History,  161-165  >  his  final 
verdict  on  The  History,  165- 
167  ;  his  reply  to  Froude' s 
challenge  to  The  Saturday 
Review  editor,  170,  171  ;  his 
attack  on  Froude's  papers  on 
the  Life  and  Times  of  Becket 
175-182  ;  his  "  Last  Words  on 
Mr.  Froude,"  184-186 ;  his 
present  influence,  186 ;  bio- 
grapher's statement  regarding 
his  character,  381  ;  his  death, 
381  ;  Froude  succeeds  him  as 
Regius  Professor  of  Modern 
History  at  Oxford,  381  ;  ex- 
tract of  letter  from  Stubbs  on 
Oxford  Professorship,  388 
Frere,  Sir  Bartle,  268,  277 
Froude,  Archdeacon  (father), 

2-4,  17,  20,  37,  92,  415,  416 
Froude,  Mrs.  (mother),  4-5 
Froude,    Hurrell    (brother),    4, 
7-9,  12,  13,  14,  15,  17,  20,  21, 
23,  36,  183,  415 
Froude,  John  (brother),  7 
Froude,  Robert  (brother),  4,  7, 

13 
Froude,    William    (brother),    7, 

17,  39i 

Froude,  Mrs.  (first  wife),  53,  114 
Froude,  Mrs.  (second  wife),   116, 

250,  251 

Froude,  Mr.  Ashley  (son),  352 
Froude,    Miss    (daughter),    264, 

265 
Froude,     James    Anthony,     his 

birth,  2  ;  character  of  parents, 


2-5  ;  his  mother's  death,  5  ; 
his  early  reading,  5,  10,  14, 
1 6 ;  his  charming  sisters  and 
gifted  brothers,  6-8  ;  Hurrell's 
harsh  treatment,  7-9 ;  his 
first  school,  9,  10  ;  his  passion 
for  Greek,  10  ;  sent  to  West- 
minster, 10  ;  his  unhappy  and 
unprogressive  life  at,  10,  n  ; 
returns  home  in  disgrace,  12  ; 
treated  with  severity  by 
his  father,  12-14 ;  regarded 
as  extremely  dull,  9,  13 ; 
his  lonely  and  unloved  boy- 
hood, 13,  14 ;  preparation 
for  Oxford,  16 ;  his  passion 
for  fishing  and  yachting,  17, 
115,  127,  378;  his  religious 
education,  18  ;  he  goes  into 
residence  at  Oriel  College, 
Oxford,  19 ;  his  early  and 
idle  life  at ;  19-22  ;  the  in- 
fluence of  Newman,  21,  31, 
96,  113,  288,  289  ;  an  engage- 
ment, 23  ;  he  takes  his  degree, 
24  ;  offered  and  accepts  tutor- 
ship in  Ireland,  26-30 ;  he 
returns  to  Oxford  and  wins 
Chancellor's  prize,  31  ;  he 
contributes  to  the  Lives  of 
Saints  series  of  tracts,  33,  34  ; 
his  opinion  of  St.  Patrick, 
34 ;  he  revisits  Ireland,  34, 
35  ;  ordained  as  a  deacon, 
35  ;  his  first  book,  37  ;  his 
third  visit  to  Ireland,  41  ;  he 
writes  The  Nemesis  of  Faith, 
45  ;  letter  to  Kingsley  on, 
46,  47  ;  letter  to  Cowley 
Powles  on  Kingsley,  47  ;  the 
reception  and  effect  of  The 
Nemesis,  47-49 ;  he  resigns 
his  Exeter  Fellowship,  49 ; 
letter  to  Clough  on  his  in- 
tellectual and  material  posi- 
tion, 50,  51  ;  accepts  Kings- 
ley's  offer  to  go  and  live  with 
him,  51  ;  free  theological 

29 


450 


INDEX 


training  at  a  German  Univer- 
sity offered  and  declined,  52  ; 
letter  to  Mrs.  Kingsley  on  his 
proposed  marriage,  53  ;  his 
marriage  and  removal  to 
North  Wales,  56,  57  ;  letter 
to  Max  Muller  describing  life 
at,  58,  59  ;  extract  from  letter 
to  Kingsley  on  the  Incarna- 
tion, 59,  60 ;  his  views  on 
Socialism,  60 ;  his  first  his- 
torical work,  64 ;  extract 
from  letter  to  Clough  on 
Maurice  and  The  History,  66  ; 
he  returns  to  Devonshire,  67  ; 
he  makes  the  acquaintance  of 
the  Carlyles,  67  ;  extract  from 
letter  to  Muller  giving  his 
views  on  the  Russian  War  and 
French  Alliance,  70,  71  ;  his 
close  following  of  Carlyle,  78, 
87,  88,  90,  94,  97,  104,  130, 
132,  133,  201,  210,  220,  227, 
246,  258,  270,  281,  301,  341, 
342,  349,  396,  397  ;  his  labo- 
rious study  and  diligent  re- 
search, 78,  98,  148,  192,  199, 
242  ;  the  publication  of  the 
first  two  volumes  of  The  His- 
tory, 89  ;  reviews  of,  91,  96, 
1 06 ;  the  success  of  The 
History,  91,  92,  106,  107  ;  the 
weak  points  in  The  History, 
101,  103,  104  ;  death  of  Mrs. 
Froude  (first  wife)  and  his 
removal  to  London,  114;  he 
becomes  editor  of  Fraser's 
Magazine,  114;  he  visits  Si- 
mancas  in  search  of  material 
for  The  History,  115,  116  ;  his 
second  marriage,  116;  Lord 
Salisbury  gives  him  permis- 
sion to  search  Cecil  papers  at 
Hatfield,  117  ;  letters  to  Lady 
Salisbury  on,  117-121  ;  ex- 
tract from  letter  to  Skelton  on 
Mary  Stuart,  123,  124;  his 
verdict  on  John  Knox,  124- 


126  ;  extract  from  letter  to 
Lady  Salisbury  on  his  old- 
fashioned  ways,  127  ;  his 
favourite  churches,  128  ;  his 
conventional  literary  judg- 
ments, 1 29  ;  elected  Lord 
Rector  of  St.  Andrews  Uni- 
versity, 131,  132  ;  asked  to 
stand  as  member  of  Parlia- 
ment, 132  ;  the  completion  of 
The  History,  1 36  ;  the  true 
hero  of,  143  ;  his  admiration 
of  John  Knox,  143  ;  his  views 
on  Calvinism,  144-146  ;  Free- 
man's attacks  on  The  History 
in  The  Saturday  Review,  148  ; 
the  two  blots  in  The  History, 
161-165  ;  his  fidelity  is  at- 
tacked in  Freeman's  final  ver- 
dict on  The  History,  165-167  ; 
his  challenge  to  the  editor  of 
The  Saturday  Review  to  test 
The  History  ;  168,  169  ;  ex- 
tract from  letter  to  Skelton 
acknowledging  the  real  mis- 
takes in  The  History,  171  ;  he 
writes  "  A  Few  Words  on  Mr. 
Freeman,"  182-184 ;  his  ap- 
preciation of  Hurrell  Froude, 
183  ;  index  to  papers  collected 
during  October,  November, 
December,  1856,  189-191  ; 
letter  to  Lady  Derby  on  the 
accuracy  of  The  History,  193  ; 
his  qualifications  as  an  Irish 
historian,  199,  200 ;  his  ver- 
dict on  O'Connell,  200,  201  ; 
invited  to  lecture  in  the  United 
States,  20 1  ;  extracts  from 
letters  to  Skelton  on,  201,  202  ; 
extract  from  letter  to  his 
wife  on  American  voyage ; 
202-204  ;  his  New  York  ban- 
quet, 204  ;  his  American  lec- 
tures, 206-219  ;  American 
criticism,  208,  209,  219-221, 
222 ;  extracts  from  letters 
to  Mrs.  Froude  on  American 


INDEX 


451 


tour,  223-227  ;  extracts  from 
letters  to  Lady  Derby  on  The 
English  in  Ireland,  243,  244  ; 
his  dislike  of  Gladstone,  248  ; 
the  death  of  Mrs.  Froude 
(second  wife),  250  ;  he  leaves 
London  and  takes  a  house  at 
Corvven,  Wales,  251  ;  letter 
to  Lady  Derby  on  Corwen, 
251,  252  ;  he  leaves  England 
for  South  Africa,  256 ;  his 
travels  in,  259-262  ;  he  re- 
turns to  England,  262  ;  his 
second  visit  to  South  Africa, 
263-269  ;  letter  to  his  daughter 
on  the  political  situation  at 
Cape  Town,  264,  265  ;  he  re- 
turns to  England,  270 ;  the  re- 
port of  his  investigations  laid 
before  Parliament,  270  ;  letter 
to  Lady  Derby  on  his  proposed 
Parliamentary  candidature, 
277,  278  ;  extracts  from  letters 
to  Lady  Derby  on  the  Eastern 
Question,  279,  280,  281-286  ; 
his  opinion  of  Mrs.  Carlyle, 
289  ;  his  intimate  friendship 
with  Carlyle,  289,  292,  296, 
297  ;  Mrs.  Carlyle's  Letters 
and  Memorials  handed  over 
to  him  by  Carlyle,  294 ; 
letter  from  Carlyle  regarding 
the  publication  of,  294  ;  asked 
to  undertake  Carlyle's  bio- 
graphy, 297, 298 ;  his  champion- 
ship of  Mrs.  Carlyle,  300 ; 
publication  of  Reminiscences, 
303  ;  differences  with  the 
Carlyle  family,  304  ;  extract 
from  note  forbidding  publica- 
tion of  the  Reminiscences,  306  ; 
accused  by  Mary  Carlyle  of 
violating  Carlyle's  directions, 

307  ;    his  defence,   307,   308  ; 
Mary     Carlyle's     attempt     to 
secure      another     biographer, 

308  ;     extract  from  letter  he 
received     from     Mr.     Justice 


Stephen  on,  3 1 1  ;  extract  from 
letter  to  Max  Muller  regarding 
the  biography,  311,  312  ;  pub- 
lication of  first  two  volumes 
of  Carlyle's  Life,  312  ;  his 
ideas  of  a  biographer's  duty, 
316,  317  ;  publication  of  Let- 
ters and  Memorials  of  Jane 
Welsh  Carlyle,  320  ;  publica- 
tion of  Carlyle's  Life  in  London, 
322 ;  letter  to  Lady  Derby 
regarding  the  biography  and 
South  African  politics,  329, 
330  ;  letter  to  Mrs.  Kingsley 
about  the  Carlyle  book,  330, 
331;  his  opinion  of  his  volume 
on  C&sar,  338  ;  letter  to  Lady 
Derby  on  Ccssar,  342,  343  ; 
his  book  on  Bunyan,  343, 
344  ;  letters  to  Lady  Derby 
on  the  elections  of  1880  and 
1886,  344,  345,  346,  347  ; 
letter  from  Cardinal  Newman, 
347,  348  ;  his  admiration  for 
Newman,  346,  348  ;  his  eu- 
logy on  Luther,  348,  349  ;  he 
leaves  England  for  Austra- 
lasia, 352  ;  his  third  visit  to 
South  Africa,  353,  354;  he 
visits  Australia,  New  Zealand, 
and  America,  353,  354 ;  his 
visit  to  the  West  Indies,  354  ; 
extracts  from  diary  kept  dur- 
ing journey  to,  355-360  ;  pub- 
lication of  book  on  the  West 
Indies,  360 ;  his  views  on 
Imperial  Federation,  363 ; 
publication  of  The  Two  Chiefs 
of  Dunboy,  365-367  ;  his  Life 
of  Beacons-field  published,  367  ; 
his  yachting  journeys  to  Nor- 
way with  Lord  Ducie,  378  ; 
his  passion  for  the  sea,  337, 
377»  378  ;  he  succeeds  Free- 
man as  Regius  Professor  of 
Modern  History  at  Oxford, 
381  ;  life  at  Oxford,  384-386, 
390-393  ;  the  welcome  of  old 


452 


INDEX 


friends,  386  ;  letter  to  Lady 
Derby  on  the  death  of  his 
brother  William,  391  ;  the  suc- 
cess of  his  Lectures,  384,  401, 
413  ;  letter  to  Skelton  on  the 
Oxford  lecture  system,  410  ; 
his  popularity  at,  411,  412, 
413  ;  he  leaves  Oxford  for 
Devonshire  worn  out  and 
broken  down,  414  ;  his  death, 
October  20,  1894,  415  ;  the 
man,  the  historian,  and  the 
biographer,  415-428;  his  re- 
ligious position,  429-432  ;  his 
friends,  433~435  ;  nis  great 
conversational  powers,  435, 
436  ;  his  vast  reading  and 
wide  human  experience,  438- 
442. 

References  to  his  works  : 
The  Shadow  of  the  Clouds,  37, 

97 

The  Lieutenant's  Daughter,  37 
The  Nemesis  of  Faith,  45-49, 

56,  97,  398,  443 
Short  Studies,  22,  25,  27,  55, 

114,     133,     136,    144,     173, 

2OO,  2OI,  219,  257,  259,  26l, 

276,  347,  376,  377,  390,431. 

439 
The  History  of  England,  72- 

146 
The    Divorce  of   Katharine   of 

Aragon,  193 
The  English  in  Ireland,  229- 

249 
The  Early  Life  of  Carlyle,  288- 

336 
Carlyle's  Life  in  London,  288- 

336 

Ccesar,  337~343 
Life    of   John    Bunyan,    343- 

344 

Oceana,  347,  351 
The  English  in  the  West  Indies, 

360-364 
The    Two    Chiefs    of   Dunboy, 

365-367,   4i6 


Life  of  Beacons-field,  367-375 
Council  of  Trent,  399-401 
English   Seamen,   401-403 
Life  and  Letters  of  Erasmus, 
403-409,   413 

GASQUET,  FATHER,    101 
Gibbon,  Edward,  14,  73,  91,  93, 

124,  131,  168,  193,  396 
Gladstone,  W.  E.,  133,  150,  203, 

2O7,    211,    242,    247,    248,    253, 

254,  276,  279,  280,  281,  282, 
287,  324,  334,  344,  353,  356, 

370,  37i,  373,  392 
Goethe,  405 
Grant,  President,  204 
Gratton,  Henry,  218,  219,  234, 

240,  243,  244,  246 
Green,  J.  R.,  177,  186 
Greenwood,  Mr.  Frederick,  168 
Gregory  XIII.,  122,  138 
Grenfell,    Charlotte,    53 
Grey,  Sir  George,  354,  414 
Grim,  Edward,  180,  181, 

HALLAM,    HENRY,    69,    75,    96, 

112,   162,  442 
Harte,  Bret,  194,  195,  222 
Hatton,  Sir  Christopher,  155,  156 
Helps,  Sir  Arthur,  67,  351 
Henry  II.,  178,  218 
Henry  VIII.,  64,  74,  75,  78,  84, 
87,    89-91,    92,    94-106,    109, 
in,   121,   136,   143,   174,   190, 
191,  209,  210,  248,  373,  396, 
397,  399,  400,  401,  405,  418, 
419,  420,  426,  428,  440 
Hook,  Dean,  151 
Hooper,  Bishop,   155,   183 
Hope,  Beresford,  123,  147 
Howard,  Catherine,  101 
Hume,  David,  25,  69,  82 
Hume,  Mr.  Martin,   197,  198 
Hurrell,  Miss,  2 

IRVING,  EDWARD,  302,  303,  314 
JACKSON,  DR.,  386 


INDEX 


453 


James  I.,  213 

James  II.,  216 

Jeffrey,  Francis,  303,  317 

Johnson,  Dr.,  39 

Jowett,  Prof.,  383,  392 

KEBLE,  JOHN,   16,  21,  36,   148, 

325 
Kimberley,  Lord,  254,  255,  257, 

262,  266,  271,  278 
Kingsley,  Charles,  40,  41,  46,  47, 

51,52,  58-60,  64,  113,  173.433 
Kingsley,  Mrs.,  53,  54,  330,  331, 

434 

Knox,  John,  77,  123,  124-126, 
143,  144,  146,  441 

LAKE,  GENERAL,  235 
Lang,  Mr.  Andrew,  421,  422 
Latimer,  Bishop,  107,  in,  125, 

183,  400 
Lecky,  W.  E.  H.,  232,  233,  237, 

243,  245,  247,  303,  335 
Leo  X.,  349,  350,  407 
Leslie,  Norman,  145 
Lewes,  Cornewall,  67,  96 
Lexovia,  Bishop  of,  154 
Lightfoot,  Dr.,  92,  97,  370 
Lockhart,  314,  335 
Louis  XIV.,  76 
Luther,  Martin,  86,  103,  248,  249, 

390,  399.  404.  405 

MACAULAY,  LORD,  10,  69,  72,  75, 
91.  93»  96,  105,  106,  107,  no, 
124,  126,  155,  185,  188,  192, 

325»  334,  338,  362,  379,  399, 

400,  422,  442 

Maitland  of  Lethington,  123 
Martin,  Sir  Theodore,  434 
Mary,  Queen,  75,  102,  108-110, 

138,  142,  417,  420 
Maurice,  F.  D.,  59,  66,  375 
Melbourne,  Lord,  90 
Mill,  John  Stuart,   10,  44,  291, 

39i 

Milnes,  Monckton  (Lord  Hough- 
ton),  29,  52 


Molteno,  Sir,  J.  C.,  255,  256,  263, 

266,  268,  272,  275,  353 
Mommsen,  Theodor,  72,  340,  341 
More,  Sir  Thomas,  63,  75,  76,  95, 
100,  102,  103,  106,  112,   176, 

403,  405 

Morley,  Mr.  John,  335,  343 
Morton,  Earl,  124,  125 
Muller,  Max,  58,  59,  144,  384, 

385,  386,  387 
Murray,  Regent,  123,  125,  138 

NAPOLEON,  Louis,  70,  72,  87, 
440 

Newcastle,  Duke  of,  89 

Newman,  Cardinal,  6,  19,  21,  24, 
25,  29,  30,  31,  33,  34,  35,  36, 
41,46,  55,61,73,  in,  112,  113, 
288,  289,  291,  347,  348,  389, 
391,  416,  433 

Norfolk,  Duke  of,  69,  119 

North,  Lord,  156 

Norton,  Eliot,  332,  333 

O'CONNELL,    DANIEL,    27,    201, 

2O2,    221,    242,   248 

Oxford  Movement,  The,  7,  21. 62, 
112,  148,  416 

PAGET,  DR.,  386 

Palmerston,  Lord,  88,  90,   113, 

3Si,  352 

Parker,  John,  67,  69,  1 14 
Parker,  Archbishop,  122 
Parsons,  Robert,  140 
Peabody,  George,  223,  225,  226 
Peel,  Sir  Robert,  28,  29,  88,  132, 

324,  37i 

Philip  II.,  142,  195-197,  198 
Pitt,  William,  236,  237 
Pole,  Archbishop,  107,  108-110, 

190,  420 

Powles,  Cowley,  47,  433 
Pius  V.,  139 
Pusey,  Dr.,  30 

REEVE,  HENRY,  96-106 
Reid,  Stuart  J.,  367,  368,  370 


/    / 


A          /"\  ""  '''I  II 


